The comey memo and double standards from mainstream media - General

[video=youtube;RkW8MJg5M9w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkW8MJg5M9w[/video] Yeah, it's Tim Pool, but try watching the video. He talks about being skeptical and that journalists shouldn't jump the gun and claim allegations as evidence. That mainstream media call out others as fake news and not to be trusted and then require people to trust them at the same time. Also changing articles, sometimes completely changing the meaning of it after its already been published for a while.

[QUOTE=RB33;52246860]That mainstream media call out others as fake news and not to be trusted and then require people to trust them at the same time.[/QUOTE] If you wanna trust a fucking Youtuber over a media company that has been around for a hundred years, that has actual accountability and has to actually follow rules and regulations, you can go right ahead, but be aware that [I]you're doing exactly the same thing you're decrying[/I].

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52248668]If you wanna trust a fucking Youtuber over a media company that has been around for a hundred years, that has actual accountability and has to actually follow rules and regulations, you can go right ahead, but be aware that [I]you're doing exactly the same thing you're decrying[/I].[/QUOTE] If you wanna be unskeptical and believe them fully despite sketchy practices, that's even worse. There is a middle between full trust in the mainstream media (which is undeserved) and trust in conspiracy extremist sites instead. We should hold them accountable, i don't see why that's such a bad thing. If they have accountability, how do they get away with what he said? An allegation is taken as evidence by actual journalists and articles compeletely change their meaning, can you defend that? I would appreciate if you explained why i'm dumb instead.

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52248668]If you wanna trust a fucking Youtuber over a media company that has been around for a hundred years, that has actual accountability and has to actually follow rules and regulations, you can go right ahead, but be aware that [I]you're doing exactly the same thing you're decrying[/I].[/QUOTE] You should never trust one source specifically, because people are always biased and will always act on that bias even if they don't do so intentionally. The problem is when sources start colluding. Then it doesn't matter how many sources you follow. This is why news/media collusion is such a threat to objective truth and why people have so little faith in the mass media. Are youtubers a better source of news? Obviously not. They're just as biased and they often just make shit up. But at least you don't get the idea that youtubers are all working together to feed you a giant bullshit sandwich.

[QUOTE=RB33;52246860]Yeah, it's Tim Pool, but try watching the video. [/QUOTE] When will people learn that if you have to post "yeah, it's [insert terrible person name] but try watching the video" along with the video, then maybe it's not a good idea to post the video in the first place?

I'm beginning to tire of the hate for mainstream media as it because more and more obvious that guys like Tim Pool are only trying to perpetuate the idea because they consider them their competition. But of the big sites and papers are fantastic at journalism (BBC or the Economist for example) and don't even factor into this discussion. Plus these new media guys who are so great reporting "non biased and true news" are bloody using mainstream media as sources for their own news, if they even use sources. I direct you to this video for the reasons this mainstream media hate is bollocks because it's said better than I ever could: [video]https://youtu.be/JvBRe5IuRBU[/video]

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52248668]If you wanna trust a fucking Youtuber over a media company that has been around for a hundred years,[b] that has actual accountability and has to actually follow rules and regulations,[/b] you can go right ahead, but be aware that [I]you're doing exactly the same thing you're decrying[/I].[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/naive[/url]

[QUOTE=Ithon;52249449][url]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/naive[/url][/QUOTE] That's for the US. In most of Europe, large corporations will get sued for false reporting. In Germany they have to print huge corrections when that happens, which they try to avoid for obvious reasons. (Except Bild... though that's a tabloid so them getting into lawsuits over sensationalism and calumny is almost a given.)

[QUOTE=Tamschi;52249471]That's for the US. In most of Europe, large corporations will get sued for false reporting. In Germany they have to print huge corrections when that happens, which they try to avoid for obvious reasons. (Except Bild... though that's a tabloid so them getting into lawsuits over sensationalism and calumny is almost a given.)[/QUOTE] my statement still stands especially with places like BBC

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52249234]When will people learn that if you have to post "yeah, it's [insert terrible person name] but try watching the video" along with the video, then maybe it's not a good idea to post the video in the first place?[/QUOTE] Is Tim Pool terrible, if you consider him that, why in that case? He isn't Sargon, far from it, he's not alt-right either. What you should do is open up to hearing other sides, that you don't usually hear (the same goes for the right-wing people). If you don't, you risk becoming close-minded. Now, has anyone actually watched the video and have any opinion regarding its content?

[QUOTE=RB33;52249852]Is Tim Pool terrible, if you consider him that, why in that case? He isn't Sargon, far from it, he's not alt-right either. What you should do is open up to hearing other sides, that you usually don't hear (the same goes for the right-wing people). If you don't, you risk becoming close-minded. Now, has anyone actually watched the video and have any opinion regarding its content?[/QUOTE] I'll watch it when I get back home, but I already know I will disagree with what he has to say.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52249905]I'll watch it when I get back home, but I already know I will disagree with what he has to say.[/QUOTE] Sure, I just wanted to give you a different side of the story.

Just my take on it. But I feel people are misrepresenting what the argument against mainstream media is. (The right or Alt-right likes to take progressive ideas and misrepresent them to fit their cause.) The issue isn't lack of trust or fake news, the issue is on what they don't cover, and cover, and to a lesser extent, Bias and false equivalence.

love how you're still trying to push this shithead as nothing more than a "skeptic" "desperately biased", "manipulative" and "dishonest" are the words you're looking for

[QUOTE=RB33;52249908]Sure, I just wanted to give you a different side of the story.[/QUOTE] Okay, so I don't even know where to start with this. The video starts off with him talking about Comey, but then he shifts the topic to the MSM changing their articles for some reason. So then he says that he knows a guy who knows a guy in the media, and apparently they change their articles all the time, and we're supposed to believe it. Like, literally no sane person ever takes the media at face value, this proves nothing, and the whole talk about the MSM takes us nowhere. So let's get back to the Comey fiasco for a second. There's no proof that Trump ordered Comey to stop the investigation into Flynn, so the MSM didn't have a right to say that Trump is guilty of anything. That's true, but first off all, no one doubts for a second that Trump is guilty as fuck. Being the massive idiot that he is, he's incriminating himself further and further every single day, on Twitter on all places. So let's rewind the video to 7:38. [quote="Tim Poop"]I guarantee you right now, many people, 100%, without a doubt believe that Trump [b]ordered[/b] Comey to end the investigation into Flynn, because they're not going to read the story, they're going to hear it from one of their friends, from someone else, and that's just incorrect[/quote] I don't need to read a story to know Trump did something wrong, all I need to do is read his Twitter page. That's the Twitter page of a man who obviously did something very wrong. What is worse is that he's very heavily implying that Trump is actually innocent here. He does it as a very slight hint, but he does do it. What a manipulative fucking bastard this guy is. "The mainstream media can't say that Trump is guilty, so he's probably innocent, makes sense, right?". So I've just watched a video about a man complaining about the mainstream media editing articles and saying stuff without proof. Apparently the mainstream media should manipulate people in more subtle ways and on the fly, like Tim fucking Pool does. Or, at least, he tries to, because you need a few loose screws in the head to fall for it.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52250599]Okay, so I don't even know where to start with this. The video starts off with him talking about Comey, but then he shifts the topic to the MSM changing their articles for some reason. So then he says that he knows a guy who knows a guy in the media, and apparently they change their articles all the time, and we're supposed to believe it.[/QUOTE] He said he worked at a news site and he asked them about it, they told him that's what they were doing. Sure, don't believe in it, that's your right. [QUOTE]Like, literally no sane person ever takes the media at face value, this proves nothing, and the whole talk about the MSM takes us nowhere.[/QUOTE] Maybe people on Facepunch don't take it at face value. There are certainly people who do (Trump supports in pro-Trump media as an example). [QUOTE]So let's get back to the Comey fiasco for a second. There's no proof that Trump ordered Comey to stop the investigation into Flynn, so the MSM didn't have a right to say that Trump is guilty of anything. That's true, but first off all, no one doubts for a second that Trump is guilty as fuck. Being the massive idiot that he is, he's incriminating himself further and further every single day, on Twitter on all places. So let's rewind the video to 7:38.[/QUOTE] So Trump being gulity of a lot of other things means he has to also be guilty of this. Likely guilty and actually guilty are different things. [QUOTE]I don't need to read a story to know Trump did something wrong, all I need to do is read his Twitter page. That's the Twitter page of a man who obviously did something very wrong.[/QUOTE] So you don't even need journalists, you already know he's guilty no matter what? [QUOTE]What is worse is that he's very heavily implying that Trump is actually innocent here. He does it as a very slight hint, but he does do it. What a manipulative fucking bastard this guy is. "The mainstream media can't say that Trump is guilty, so he's probably innocent, makes sense, right?"[/QUOTE] It's not about him being innocent, it's about being careless about declaring him guilty. The media is claiming evidence based on allegations, take that method and apply it to anyone else, is that acceptable? [QUOTE]So I've just watched a video about a man complaining about the mainstream media editing articles and saying stuff without proof. Apparently the mainstream media should manipulate people in more subtle ways and on the fly, like Tim fucking Pool does. Or, at least, he tries to, because you need a few loose screws in the head to fall for it.[/QUOTE] He showed proof, look at 5:20, do you believe he faked it? This is the wiki page for the website he used as evidence: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsDiffs[/url] Seriously, what the hell is this article they changed: [url]http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html[/url] (Read it for yourselves, it's about Reddit and Ellen Pao)

[QUOTE=RB33;52250814]He said he worked at a news site and he asked them about it, they told him that's what they were doing. Sure, don't believe in it, that's your right. Maybe people on Facepunch don't take it at face value. There are certainly people who do (Trump supports in pro-Trump media as an example). So Trump being gulity of a lot of other things means he has to also be guilty of this. Likely guilty and actually guilty are different things. So you don't even need journalists, you already know he's guilty no matter what? It's not about him being innocent, it's about being careless about declaring him guilty. The media is claiming evidence based on allegations, take that method and apply it to anyone else, is that acceptable? He showed proof, look at 5:20, do you believe he faked it? This is the wiki page for the website he used as evidence: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsDiffs[/url] Seriously, what the hell is this article they changed: [url]http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html[/url] (Read it for yourselves, it's about Reddit and Ellen Pao)[/QUOTE] I don't know what that article is, I'm guessing you have an explanation, a motive, an intent, and everything else so we can tie to the MSM and drag them through the mud? Yes, currently the majority of what is happening is based on allegations. We are talking about investigating the guy who can generally speaking, fire the people investigating him, who has said things so damning as to make skepticism quite difficult and you're wondering why people are likely to believe Trump has done things that make him guilty? Well golly fucking gee fucking wilikers buddy.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52251142]I don't know what that article is, I'm guessing you have an explanation, a motive, an intent, and everything else so we can tie to the MSM and drag them through the mud? Yes, currently the majority of what is happening is based on allegations. We are talking about investigating the guy who can generally speaking, fire the people investigating him, who has said things so damning as to make skepticism quite difficult and you're wondering why people are likely to believe Trump has done things that make him guilty? Well golly fucking gee fucking wilikers buddy.[/QUOTE] Trump probably did what he's accused of, i'm not gonna deny that, there's a difference between us assuming he's guilty and the media claiming to have evidence, when they only have allegations. The media should have higher standards than ordinary people. No, I don't have an explantion for the article changes. Does the newspaper, i wonder. I'm not about shiting on MSM, I just want them to behave more credible, so people regain more trust in them.

You shouldn't take any authority absolutely at its word. This includes journalists, academics, intellectuals, and politicians (particularly politicians). If someone says they have this letter exposing Trump bigly but can't source it nor provide the original documentation then some skepticism is warranted. That said, mainstream media (including papers like NYT and WaPo) have reputations at stake. Some of these places have existed for over a hundred years. They are widely recognized by their peers for accurate, critical reporting. Trust in this case shouldn't be an all or nothing case, but a gradient. As an example, I personally trust WaPo and the NYT more than I would CNN, whom I would trust more than Fox and MSNBC, who I would trust more than Huffpo and Salon, and so on until you get to genuine fake news. Also if we are going to take about bias and skewed perspectives, it should be noted (and I'm sure everyones aware) that this dude has a vested personal and financial interest in making conventional media seem untrustworthy. [editline]19th May 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=RB33;52249908]Sure, I just wanted to give you a different side of the story.[/QUOTE] the "different side of the story" just a mirror of what he accuses the MSM of; you can't trust them, trust me. Also if you don't trust me you are an "uninitiated" idiot.

[QUOTE=RB33;52250814]He said he worked at a news site and he asked them about it, they told him that's what they were doing. Sure, don't believe in it, that's your right. Maybe people on Facepunch don't take it at face value. There are certainly people who do (Trump supports in pro-Trump media as an example). So Trump being gulity of a lot of other things means he has to also be guilty of this. Likely guilty and actually guilty are different things. So you don't even need journalists, you already know he's guilty no matter what? It's not about him being innocent, it's about being careless about declaring him guilty. The media is claiming evidence based on allegations, take that method and apply it to anyone else, is that acceptable? He showed proof, look at 5:20, do you believe he faked it? This is the wiki page for the website he used as evidence: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsDiffs[/url] Seriously, what the hell is this article they changed: [url]http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html[/url] (Read it for yourselves, it's about Reddit and Ellen Pao)[/QUOTE] I don't doubt for a second that the MSM does shady shit. I never trusted the media and I never will. But that has nothing to do with the Comey incident, it does not make Trump innocent (he clearly isn't), and it doesn't make the likes of Tim Pool a more trustworthy alternative to the MSM.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52253901]I don't doubt for a second that the MSM does shady shit. I never trusted the media and I never will. But that has nothing to do with the Comey incident, it does not make Trump innocent (he clearly isn't), and it doesn't make the likes of Tim Pool a more trustworthy alternative to the MSM.[/QUOTE] Well, the video was for the most part not about the Comey incident. He probably just named it that for publicitys sake. Did he try to make Trump innocent? Tim Pool isn't an alternative, just use all kinds of sources and be critical in what you read.

[QUOTE=Toyokunari;52250206]Just my take on it. But I feel people are misrepresenting what the argument against mainstream media is. (The right or Alt-right likes to take progressive ideas and misrepresent them to fit their cause.) The issue isn't lack of trust or fake news, the issue is on what they don't cover, and cover, and to a lesser extent, Bias and false equivalence.[/QUOTE] Except there's loads of people who do legitimately think that actual fake news is a problem in "mainstream media", as in straight up fabricated bullshit. Incredible amounts of people genuinely believe this.

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52248668]If you wanna trust a fucking Youtuber over a media company that has been around for a hundred years, that has actual accountability and has to actually follow rules and regulations, you can go right ahead, but be aware that [I]you're doing exactly the same thing you're decrying[/I].[/QUOTE] Most people don't trust the mainstream media anymore because they routinely lie or omit information. They are becoming obsolete because of digital media and this whole "fake news" scandal they tried so desperately to push has blown up in their faces. The digital age has allowed the dissemination of mass information, for better or worse and we are never going back to the days of traditional media being the authority on truth and information.

[QUOTE=Jack32;52258230]Most people don't trust the mainstream media anymore because they routinely lie or omit information. They are becoming obsolete because of digital media and this whole "fake news" scandal they tried so desperately to push has blown up in their faces. The digital age has allowed the dissemination of mass information, for better or worse and we are never going back to the days of traditional media being the authority on truth and information.[/QUOTE] Here's a thing that people don't realize often about the "digital age", as much as it has democratized the access of information, and as much as it has allowed people everywhere to become able to see the facts from different sources that wouldn't normally be seen or heard, it has also made the spread of misinformation easier than ever. Communities and cults that used to be shunned for their radicalism now also have a voice and are allowed to spread their message of hatred and their misinformation freely. You can see this in action through the amount of people that legitimately believe the earth is flat, or anti-vaccers, or neo-nazis; once they were isolated, now they can easily spread their message and mute voices of reason. More than ever we need to combat the tribalism and isolationism of the radical few. We need sources we can trust, we need sources with history, we need to know where the consensus lies. Fake news are real, misinformation is real, and the only way to combat it is by accepting multiple sources for your information. [QUOTE=Ithon;52249449][url]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/naive[/url][/QUOTE] Please tell me exactly what regulations and standards is Tim Pool liable for. If he spreads news that are untrue, can I sue him? Will he issue a retraction?

"it's [NAME], but try watching the video." you know you're in for a big one when it has to be rationalized to listen

[QUOTE=Jack32;52258230]Most people don't trust the mainstream media anymore because they routinely lie or omit information. They are becoming obsolete because of digital media and this whole "fake news" scandal they tried so desperately to push has blown up in their faces. The digital age has allowed the dissemination of mass information, for better or worse and we are never going back to the days of traditional media being the authority on truth and information.[/QUOTE] And yet the Washington Post and New York Times has gotten a record number of subscriptions this year hmmmmmmmmm

Can we agree at this point that anyone who uses the term "mainstream media" is not worthy of being listened to?

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;52258451]Can we agree at this point that anyone who uses the term "mainstream media" is not worthy of being listened to?[/QUOTE] It's not a bad term. It's the people who use it as something for their audience to fear and hate that you need to be suspicious of.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;52258451]Can we agree at this point that anyone who uses the term "mainstream media" is not worthy of being listened to?[/QUOTE] Well no, the term is very broad and has plenty of valid uses. What you should keep an eye out for is people who skew what "mainstream media" is. Idiots like Tim Pool, for example, would have you believe all mainstream media is leftist. How many times does he mention Fox News and the way its massive viewership often surpasses that of more centrist networks, for example? Or the fact that right wing tabloids in Britain outnumber left/center ones in terms of sales by over ten times?

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52258317]Here's a thing that people don't realize often about the "digital age", as much as it has democratized the access of information, and as much as it has allowed people everywhere to become able to see the facts from different sources that wouldn't normally be seen or heard, it has also made the spread of misinformation easier than ever. Communities and cults that used to be shunned for their radicalism now also have a voice and are allowed to spread their message of hatred and their misinformation freely. You can see this in action through the amount of people that legitimately believe the earth is flat, or anti-vaccers, or neo-nazis; once they were isolated, now they can easily spread their message and mute voices of reason. More than ever we need to combat the tribalism and isolationism of the radical few. We need sources we can trust, we need sources with history, we need to know where the consensus lies. Fake news are real, misinformation is real, and the only way to combat it is by accepting multiple sources for your information. Please tell me exactly what regulations and standards is Tim Pool liable for. If he spreads news that are untrue, can I sue him? Will he issue a retraction?[/QUOTE] But what makes a source trusted? All news essentially just comes down to personal opinion. [editline]22nd May 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Trebgarta;52258345]"Media routinely lies, no way to trust them" "Digital media is more trustable and Fake News are a myth" How can you be more wrong about the media?[/QUOTE] I didn't say digital media is more trustable, just that more people have a voice and that's not necessarily a bad thing. And yes, people don't trust the mainstream media, check any poll.