- Moderator
- #221
Actually the law that protects those private entities REQUIRES they include everyone that's the whole purpose of the protection.i want a place where all people can talk freely. we used to be able to do that but somewhere along the way one side started saying "you can't call someone that...you can't say that...that's offensive" and simply kept ratcheting up their "you can't" scenarios.A day at the Dem Underground? That is kind of funny...they, deservedly have a similarly low rating.[
I have nothing against questioning studies with well reasoned arguments, whether it is about Covid or MMGW (thanks FCT for translating), but I'm guessing it is more than that going on in the Treehouse.
What's going on at the TreeHouse I hear about every day from the wife unit.. And it's a respected form of investigative journalism --- ALL spearheaded by the ONE blogger that runs it.,. Many members of CONGRESS are known fans..
Can you provide a link to this place where you think it is a respected form of investigative journalism.
I went to a site to check it out.
The Last Refuge
Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits - Contact Info: [email protected]theconservativetreehouse.com
I did read some of the articles (posts). I'll read some more. But I am not sure I see what you are seeing.
How did you determine they "respected form of investigative journalism"?
I’m not sure they are either, at least if I look them up here: The Last Refuge (Conservative Treehouse) - Media Bias/Fact Check
This site states they promote a lore of conspiracy, fake news, have poor sourcing and transparency which might be what is getting them in trouble with Wordpress sopince it seems platforms aren’t cracking down on this.
Wow -- Your substitute brain at Media Bias takes points off to nit pick the strangest shit about CTHouse ---
The Last Refuge is a conservative news and opinion blog that encourages comments on their posts. According to their about page: “Fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.” This biased statement is reflected in the content of the website.
Wow.,. Was COMPLETELY UNAWARE YOU CAN FACT-CHECK OPINION !!!! If you fall this analysis you're a mental midget.. Such DANGEROUS talk eh? You want to compare to a day at Demo Underground about "unsourced opinion..
But WAIT -- it gets better.. Evidently you can get points off for juicing a title.. EVEN A LITTLE BIT..
There is considerable use of loaded language in headlines such as this: Sketchy Business: Grassley Releases Original Ford Letter to Feinstein… Although this particular article is written well and utilizes sourcing, it ends in big bold letters LIES!, conveying strong support for Judge Kavanaugh without evidence.
Wow.. Now ain't that kindergarden level picky. WELL WRITTEN -- WELL SOURCED -- But "Sketchy Business in the TITLE??? Burn 'em.
Need to nuke some fact checkers.. They piss me off posing as objective judges OF ANYTHING.. Especially when they fancy themselves important at all to "free expression" or "free speech"..
Democratic Underground - Bias and Credibility
LEFT BIAS These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They maymediabiasfactcheck.com
Yah know how many times I have been banned at the democrat underground? At least 10 times for life
The last time they got pissed off by me saying poor people subsidize rich people for electric cars. .
From your link
Overall, we rate Democratic Underground Left Biased based on story selection and political affiliation with the Democratic Party. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the use of poor sources and a few failed fact checks.
Exactly.. We cant agree on what "hate speech" is and we cant agree on "who's a racist" and we cant agree on "the number of genders" and we cant agree on most ANY political issue -- but YET these fucking fact checkers SPIN their ratings to their POV.. In fact the basic question is WHY a fact checker should EVEN DRAW A CONCLUSION limited to 3 or 4 choice...
Just the facts. That's what fact-checking is.. You can actually do this YOURSELF..
Not only that - but if "flack checkers" were infallible and objective -- WHYTF would you "dueling fact checkers" on the web?? It's moronic..
The majority of the leftist leaning fact checkers are now ORGANIZED AND ALLIED by the same OBVIOUSLY biased MSMedia orgs that sponsor the Organization..
Just heard the whimp chimp Zuckerberg at Congressional Hearing BRAG about how they use "independent fact checkers at orgs like Poynter Institute.. The ROOT of the Poynter Institute is money from the dead owner of Tampa Bay times -- A MEGA-LEFTIST.. And the newspaper is ENTIRELY LEFT BIASED and always HAS BEEN.,.
This is not a solution to dividing American media into TWO giant hyperpartisan warring tribes. It will lead to DOOM and destruction of this Republic. And NOBODY important is advocating people gathering from ALL POV and discussing things out -- like we try to do AT THIS SITE.. Except maybe me.. Maybe I'm the problem and deluded...
It's gonna get REALLY DANGEROUS AND BORING when EVERYTHING media is split into 2 warring tribes like the 2 party system has forced us into..
Why are there dueling articles and "realities" on the web? Treat fact checkers like any other article instead of getting all incensed.
I'm INCENSED because the LEFT is all gung-ho to exile speech and split the media in this country.. This leads to NUCLEAR LEVEL civil conflict.,. Have Gump telling folks to "get their own site" when the country he lives in probably has 4 major media media outlets.. It pisses me off. GOOGLE HAS BOUGHT anything that moves and looks like competition.. YouTube -- Instagram -- the list goes on. And they can now STRANGLE any site that doesn't knuckle under..
You don't see a problem there? It's a question -- discuss it.. Dont fact check it..
Because I DONT WANT 3 more NewsMaxs and 5 more Daily Callers. That's NOT any kind of nirvana solution.. We dont want 3 FBs and 5 Twitters.. And I don't want or need ANY Twitters or dueling fact checkers. I want places that aren't echo chambers full of parrots and Orwellian fact checkers and biased definitions.
And we need to STOP the facade that ANYONE can dictate "whose a racist" or "what is hate speech" or whether our election has been abused or neglected.
This direction leads to hot conflict and the potential LOSS of democracy and freedom in this country.. YOU just don't care apparently...
I agree. One side started going overboard on what is considered offensive and if you're talking about all the political correctness hysteria - I likely agree with you on that. But there is something the other side is doing that is equally damaging. We have become a culture where anything goes - just because you can, do, and if anyone is offended it's their fault.
We used to have an agreed upon set of rules governing our behavior and language, and if you transgressed, the people - our peers - let you know. Free speech, like any right, carries a certain responsibility with it and people seem to want all the rights but none of the responsibility for consequences.
news media sites are no longer news but ammo for one side to fire at the other. how in the name of god is that healthy OR what we want? no "platform" should be able to tell us all what the TRUTH is. no publisher either. we should be allowed to decide that for ourselves WITHOUT harassment.
I disagree. No GOVERNMENT should limit our access to information, or determine truth for us. However, I do think it's incumbent on our elected officials to be factual and we fail at holding them accountable for that. But platforms are private entities. They have every right to determine what their rules are and what sort of environment they want as long as they treat everyone equally within the rules. They are under no obligation to host everyone or anyone and as long as there is competition
we need to get back to being able to talk about our differences at lvl 1; not instantly making any difference of opinion NAZI crap. far too many people run from 0 to EXTREME in 1 sentence.
True.
You mean the (outdated) law that is specific to platforms?
Yes, they have to include everyone - but they don't have to allow ALL content. For example they have allow leftist extremists and rightist extremists to have a space but if they have rules regarding hate speech - they can censor content per their rules.