AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

[Cellblock2429]

These guidelines make sense, given the prevalence of people misusing the term "riot" to refer to people who are just protesting. Rioting involves violence, deliberate property damage, looting, etc. Protest does not. Using the term "riot" in regard to a situation in which, for example, 500 people walk down the street carrying signs and chanting, and five of them indulge in criminal activity, is an illegitimate use of the term for misleading propaganda purposes. Journalists should not be sucked into this.

/—-/ libtards love to stifle free speech.

We are talking about journalists covering an event. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "free speech." Reporters have a duty to report in a neutral manner and not use politically "loaded" terms. A reporter can say something like, "I'm at 16th and Maple, and there is a store burning in the middle of the block. Firefighters are working to put the blaze out and police are looking for a man in a blue t-shirt, black shorts, and a bike helmet," and then interview bystanders, who give the quotes. Your "libtards" comment is ignorant. The rules are designed to maintain neutrality. You are demanding that reporters take political stands and further propaganda. It doesn't work that way.

/——/ Let the candidates debate in a free form, not by arbitrary rules from some Trump hating moderator.

 

[Lysistrata]

These guidelines make sense, given the prevalence of people misusing the term "riot" to refer to people who are just protesting. Rioting involves violence, deliberate property damage, looting, etc. Protest does not. Using the term "riot" in regard to a situation in which, for example, 500 people walk down the street carrying signs and chanting, and five of them indulge in criminal activity, is an illegitimate use of the term for misleading propaganda purposes. Journalists should not be sucked into this.

/—-/ libtards love to stifle free speech.

We are talking about journalists covering an event. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "free speech." Reporters have a duty to report in a neutral manner and not use politically "loaded" terms. A reporter can say something like, "I'm at 16th and Maple, and there is a store burning in the middle of the block. Firefighters are working to put the blaze out and police are looking for a man in a blue t-shirt, black shorts, and a bike helmet," and then interview bystanders, who give the quotes. Your "libtards" comment is ignorant. The rules are designed to maintain neutrality. You are demanding that reporters take political stands and further propaganda. It doesn't work that way.

/——/ Let the candidates debate in a free form, not by arbitrary rules from some Trump hating moderator.

You just switched topics.

I prefer the traditional, time-honored form of debate, which I trust you learned during your school days. The rules are not arbitrary. They give each participant time to speak and time to be quiet, and all participants are subject to the same rules. They are intended to prevent the sort of nonsense we saw the other night, which I predicted.

I just heard that your trump is now bitching because the debate commission is tightening the rules. This is funny, given that the candidates both agreed to the rules before the debate, and then trump proceeded to break every single one of them. He can't seem to control himself.

 

[Cellblock2429]

These guidelines make sense, given the prevalence of people misusing the term "riot" to refer to people who are just protesting. Rioting involves violence, deliberate property damage, looting, etc. Protest does not. Using the term "riot" in regard to a situation in which, for example, 500 people walk down the street carrying signs and chanting, and five of them indulge in criminal activity, is an illegitimate use of the term for misleading propaganda purposes. Journalists should not be sucked into this.

/—-/ libtards love to stifle free speech.

We are talking about journalists covering an event. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "free speech." Reporters have a duty to report in a neutral manner and not use politically "loaded" terms. A reporter can say something like, "I'm at 16th and Maple, and there is a store burning in the middle of the block. Firefighters are working to put the blaze out and police are looking for a man in a blue t-shirt, black shorts, and a bike helmet," and then interview bystanders, who give the quotes. Your "libtards" comment is ignorant. The rules are designed to maintain neutrality. You are demanding that reporters take political stands and further propaganda. It doesn't work that way.

/——/ Let the candidates debate in a free form, not by arbitrary rules from some Trump hating moderator.

You just switched topics.

I prefer the traditional, time-honored form of debate, which I trust you learned during your school days. The rules are not arbitrary. They give each participant time to speak and time to be quiet, and all participants are subject to the same rules. They are intended to prevent the sort of nonsense we saw the other night, which I predicted.

I just heard that your trump is now bitching because the debate commission is tightening the rules. This is funny, given that the candidates both agreed to the rules before the debate, and then trump proceeded to break every single one of them. He can't seem to control himself.

/—-/ Those were boring debates. I like it when the gloves come off. What are you scared of?
BTW, Biden was the first to interrupt, then Wallace, then Trump.

 

[Indeependent]

What a riot.

The AP issued new guidance on Wednesday telling journalists to avoid using the word "riot" when covering leftwing events and refrain from reporting on property destruction because, according to the AP, such reporting has been used in the past as a way to stigmatize protests against lynching and racial injustice.

AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

I'm not shocked.
I check out the AP everyday and I see stories disappear all the time.

 

[Lysistrata]

These guidelines make sense, given the prevalence of people misusing the term "riot" to refer to people who are just protesting. Rioting involves violence, deliberate property damage, looting, etc. Protest does not. Using the term "riot" in regard to a situation in which, for example, 500 people walk down the street carrying signs and chanting, and five of them indulge in criminal activity, is an illegitimate use of the term for misleading propaganda purposes. Journalists should not be sucked into this.

/—-/ libtards love to stifle free speech.

We are talking about journalists covering an event. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "free speech." Reporters have a duty to report in a neutral manner and not use politically "loaded" terms. A reporter can say something like, "I'm at 16th and Maple, and there is a store burning in the middle of the block. Firefighters are working to put the blaze out and police are looking for a man in a blue t-shirt, black shorts, and a bike helmet," and then interview bystanders, who give the quotes. Your "libtards" comment is ignorant. The rules are designed to maintain neutrality. You are demanding that reporters take political stands and further propaganda. It doesn't work that way.

/——/ Let the candidates debate in a free form, not by arbitrary rules from some Trump hating moderator.

You just switched topics.

I prefer the traditional, time-honored form of debate, which I trust you learned during your school days. The rules are not arbitrary. They give each participant time to speak and time to be quiet, and all participants are subject to the same rules. They are intended to prevent the sort of nonsense we saw the other night, which I predicted.

I just heard that your trump is now bitching because the debate commission is tightening the rules. This is funny, given that the candidates both agreed to the rules before the debate, and then trump proceeded to break every single one of them. He can't seem to control himself.

/—-/ Those were boring debates. I like it when the gloves come off. What are you scared of?
BTW, Biden was the first to interrupt, then Wallace, then Trump.

I'm not scared. I like law and order. trump just proved what many of us have long known; he has no self-control and can't follow any rules, but somehow he wants to be the "law and order" president. I want to hear what each has to say. Please explain why the orange whore can't shut up and let anyone else speak. Wallace was trying to get him to shut up as it was Biden's turn.

But this thread is not about the debate.

 

[toobfreak]

What a riot.

The AP issued new guidance on Wednesday telling journalists to avoid using the word "riot" when covering leftwing events and refrain from reporting on property destruction because, according to the AP, such reporting has been used in the past as a way to stigmatize protests against lynching and racial injustice.

AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

Yes, reporting on the actual rioting, looting, burning, and destruction of leftwing groups on cities just doesn't look good for the Biden/Harris coup.

 

[Lysistrata]

What a riot.

The AP issued new guidance on Wednesday telling journalists to avoid using the word "riot" when covering leftwing events and refrain from reporting on property destruction because, according to the AP, such reporting has been used in the past as a way to stigmatize protests against lynching and racial injustice.

AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

Yes, reporting on the actual rioting, looting, burning, and destruction of leftwing groups on cities just doesn't look good for the Biden/Harris coup.

I don't think that people who actually riot, loot, or burn actually even vote or otherwise contribute to a political party. Is every election a "coup"? This would mean that trump is not a legitimate president.

 

[toobfreak]

What a riot.

The AP issued new guidance on Wednesday telling journalists to avoid using the word "riot" when covering leftwing events and refrain from reporting on property destruction because, according to the AP, such reporting has been used in the past as a way to stigmatize protests against lynching and racial injustice.

AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

Yes, reporting on the actual rioting, looting, burning, and destruction of leftwing groups on cities just doesn't look good for the Biden/Harris coup.

I don't think that people who actually riot, loot, or burn actually even vote or otherwise contribute to a political party. Is every election a "coup"? This would mean that trump is not a legitimate president.

Well, at least you got three words right: YOU DON'T THINK. Seems to be a common problem among leftwing retards like you. Have you gone down and asked any of these people? I bet NONE of them are Trump voters. You think any Trump voters are destroying cities looking to defund police? All these people are radicals looking for huge change, and they are looking for it from the party that supports them, the radicals in the DNC like Harris.

 

[Lysistrata]

What a riot.

The AP issued new guidance on Wednesday telling journalists to avoid using the word "riot" when covering leftwing events and refrain from reporting on property destruction because, according to the AP, such reporting has been used in the past as a way to stigmatize protests against lynching and racial injustice.

AP Issues New Guidance for Reporters to Cover Up Leftist Violence

Yes, reporting on the actual rioting, looting, burning, and destruction of leftwing groups on cities just doesn't look good for the Biden/Harris coup.

I don't think that people who actually riot, loot, or burn actually even vote or otherwise contribute to a political party. Is every election a "coup"? This would mean that trump is not a legitimate president.

Well, at least you got three words right: YOU DON'T THINK. Seems to be a common problem among leftwing retards like you. Have you gone down and asked any of these people? I bet NONE of them are Trump voters. You think any Trump voters are destroying cities looking to defund police? All these people are radicals looking for huge change, and they are looking for it from the party that supports them, the radicals in the DNC like Harris.

Show where the people who do these things even vote or are registered to do so. trump voters pursue their own criminality. Some of them are prancing around in the streets in gangs, some heavily armed and attempting to intimidate people and/or trying to instigate riots. There have been some fires and window breaking, but the U.S. is nowhere near having people "destroying cities." Stop being hysterical. trump supporters need to look to their own behavior, which is not that civilized.

Go ahead. Call people vile names just because they repudiate trump. There is nothing that says anyone has to support him or praise his behavior, which has been unacceptable in an American leader.

 

[toobfreak]

trump supporters need to look to their own behavior, which is not that civilized.

I'll be sure to tell them an asshole like you thinks so.

Probably the first time you ever saw black people who weren't rioting, jumping on cop cars and looting a Walmart at 2AM.

Go ahead. Call people vle names just because they repudiate trump.

I don't need to, we have Joe Biden for that, who called the president a CLOWN, a RACIST and to SHUT UP last night and that he wasn't even listening to him because Donald tried to have a civil debate with the thug.