• CNN cuts off Chris Collins for telling the Truth about Hillary.
    140 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228831]so you know what every conceivable technical problem looks like? and the people responsible for staging this wicked plot don't know what any of them look like?[/QUOTE] I dont know how it works exactly with TV stations but in my experience when shit craps out it just kinda freezes and fucks up. I think ive seen some news interviews where they've lost signals or the signal wasnt the best and it didnt do the color bar thing, in any event, just locked up. Iunno.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51228918]I dont know how it works exactly with TV stations but in my experience when shit craps out it just kinda freezes and fucks up. I think ive seen some news interviews where they've lost signals or the signal wasnt the best and it didnt do the color bar thing, in any event, just locked up. Iunno.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure there are multiple ways a live feed could stop working
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228831]so you know what every conceivable technical problem looks like? and the people responsible for staging this wicked plot don't know what any of them look like?[/QUOTE] Don't get me wrong, the guy was a totally rambling nutjob, and should have been cut off. Should've just owned up to it. "Well, we don't need any more of THAT" or something, iunno.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228943]I'm pretty sure there are multiple ways a live feed could stop working[/QUOTE] Well yeah but im talking about how it shows up. Maybe someone can fill me in on the technical details, but why exactly would the SMPTE color bars pop up if a feed died?
[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;51228954]Don't get me wrong, the guy was a totally rambling nutjob, and should have been cut off. Should've just owned up to it. "Well, we don't need any more of THAT" or something, iunno.[/QUOTE] why is anyone assuming this wasn't just a technical error what is there to indicate this was anything more than just another technical fuckup other than memes and shitposting
[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;51228954]Don't get me wrong, the guy was a totally rambling nutjob, and should have been cut off. Should've just owned up to it. "Well, we don't need any more of THAT" or something, iunno.[/QUOTE] But it's doesn't even look like he cut him
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228961]why is anyone assuming this wasn't just a technical error what is there to indicate this was anything more than just another technical fuckup other than memes and shitposting[/QUOTE] Because it seems rather blatant/convenient, odd, and the guys response seems disingenuous.
This would be comical if it wasn't so sad. This looks like something out of a movie... like Austin Power's or something. Like, they're being so stereotypical corporate run media that they're not even trying to hide it anymore.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228961]why is anyone assuming this wasn't just a technical error what is there to indicate this was anything more than just another technical fuckup other than memes and shitposting[/QUOTE] I guess there's always one.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51228966]But it's doesn't even look like he cut him[/QUOTE] We both know that feeds are controlled in a seperate panel room overseen by producers and editors.
[QUOTE=Tudd;51229053]We both know that feeds are controlled in a seperate panel room overseen by producers and editors.[/QUOTE] yes so because that is true that means you know this was a cut feed
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51229066]yes so because that is true that means you know this was a cut feed[/QUOTE] I'm just pointing that out cause your statement sounds like you actually think the pundit can control the feed.
[QUOTE=Tudd;51229086]I'm just pointing that out cause your statement sounds like you actually think the pundit can control the feed.[/QUOTE] No I'm just relatively sure this is a technical error and not a cut feed. They bring up her faults all the time, if this was propaganda, wouldn't they always silence all critics, or not even let them on? Like I'm confused about the lengths to which we're going to believe Clinton really controls the world. I'm sure she's a dirty politician but I really am not seeing it
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51228599]You can have your personal opinions and I'm not going to be one of those people who accuse anyone acting positive or neutral towards Clinton as being a "Correct the Record shill" or anything like that, but I've offhandedly noticed several posts of yours that seem oddly dismissive of concerning topics like this or the DNC scandal. I recognize it's your personal opinion, but if you like a candidate, you should hold them to high standards so that they don't get complacent, instead of hand waving away blatant scandals or issues. Yeah, Republicans have had it in for Clinton for several years - and yes, Clinton does have positive thing she brings to the table, but not everything that comes out as a scandal is some Republican hit-piece/Russian conspiracy/etc. Some issues are genuine, and do need to be confronted. Clinton has her positive traits, and Bernie definitely dropped the ball in some areas like strong minority outreach (in case anyone wants to see me criticize who my preferred candidate was), but there is a difference between focusing on the positive and dismissing the negative. Again, this is purely anecdotal on my part as I don't extensively follow your posting history and this is just my off handed observations in election/debate threads we've both posted in.[/QUOTE] Maybe if people tried so doggedly to convince me in those relevant threads we wouldn't be driving this one off the rails. I'm dismissive of the DNC scandal because it is outrageously overblown. I've asked countless people for emails regarding corruption and collusion and 90% of the time I never get a response and the occasional link I do get has absolutely nothing to do with either corruption or collusion and after I point this out I never get a response back. [QUOTE=Tudd;51228596]I've seen him begrudgingly criticize her at best, and bend over backwards to defend her alot more in comparison. And just by reaction I think people can see that.[/QUOTE] I've criticized her in numerous posts, you can dig through SH and find them if you'd like, or you (and anyone else for that matter) can PM me as to what I think the weaknesses of her as a candidate are. The only reason it seems I'm "bending over backwards" to defend her is because people bend so far backwards to attack her. [QUOTE=Tudd;51228603]No, but I don't label people as conspiracy nuts just because I don't like their opinion.[/QUOTE] It's not that I don't like your opinion it's that you are theorizing what happened with no evidence other than an underlying bias against media and using what could in all possibility be a genuine technical issue to leapfrog to your preconceived conclusion. [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51228627]It happening twice on the same topic makes it seem more than just coincidence. Does CNN lose connection to their reporters often?[/QUOTE] What topic? Did they cut from two different people referencing Wikileaks?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51229102]No I'm just relatively sure this is a technical error and not a cut feed. They bring up her faults all the time, if this was propaganda, wouldn't they always silence all critics, or not even let them on? Like I'm confused about the lengths to which we're going to believe Clinton really controls the world. I'm sure she's a dirty politician but I really am not seeing it[/QUOTE] It's just too convenient and the host's reaction seems fake. Surely you can admit that it's not entirely unreasonable to assume that there was some sort of tampering going on here. I think assuming that it was some sort of mass-scale plan to censor Trump support in an effort to rig the election is a little tinfoily though. What's far more likely is that they cut off the feed because he wasn't actually answering the question. They're on a tight schedule and they have lots of sponsors they need to keep happy in any given 24-hour period. When you have a guy that completely dodges your question and is just blatantly there to shill for Trump, cutting off the feed seems like a reasonable response.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228961]why is anyone assuming this wasn't just a technical error what is there to indicate this was anything more than just another technical fuckup other than memes and shitposting[/QUOTE] "Anyone who disagrees is memeing and shitposting" Sorry for being suspicious about a sketchy candidate. There's no middle ground for you guys. It's either "accept 100% that it was a technical error" or "you're memeing and shitposting". [editline]19th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;51228693]then why let any trump supporters on at all like if their plan is to just not let them speak, they can not invite them and if the plan is to not let them speak, why have they already let so many speak?[/QUOTE] To have a strawman
For what it's worth, Cuomo asked Collins over Twitter about the people claiming it was cut and Collins said [URL="https://twitter.com/RepChrisCollins/status/788795580189474816"]"technical problems happen" and went on to talk about fantasy football [/URL] Maybe he is in on it though [editline]19th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51229146] To have a strawman[/QUOTE] Collins was one of the first Republican representatives to back Trump, he is quite far away from being a strawman. [editline]19th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Spacewizard;51229142]It's just too convenient and the host's reaction seems fake. Surely you can admit that it's not entirely unreasonable to assume that there was some sort of tampering going on here. I think assuming that it was some sort of mass-scale plan to censor Trump support in an effort to rig the election is a little tinfoily though. [B]What's far more likely is that they cut off the feed because he wasn't actually answering the question.[/B] They're on a tight schedule and they have lots of sponsors they need to keep happy in any given 24-hour period. When you have a guy that completely dodges your question and is just blatantly there to shill for Trump, cutting off the feed seems like a reasonable response.[/QUOTE] Have you never seen daytime news? Guests dance around questions all the time and they don't purposefully cut the feed.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51229181]For what it's worth, Cuomo asked Collins over Twitter about the people claiming it was cut and Collins said [URL="https://twitter.com/RepChrisCollins/status/788795580189474816"]"technical problems happen" and went on to talk about fantasy football[/QUOTE] Maybe he's suffering from internalized misrepublicanism. Only reasonable explanation for why he doesn't think that CNN is out to get him.
[QUOTE=ThurnisHaley;51228094][media]https://youtu.be/d4YQ6n9_y8E[/media] CNN should work on their "oh no that sucks :(" speech[/QUOTE] idk this seems like a legitimate time to cut someone off. She gave him 60 seconds and he went over just preaching non stop
[QUOTE=Untouch;51227928]if there's one thing good to come from this election is that it's been a huge wakeup call for how unethical news is in the US[/QUOTE] Oh people know, trust me people know. It is talked about every day. It's just they're to damn lazy to do anything about it.
This looks too good to be true.
I guess we all better start reading/watching Breitbart and Infowars for our news now.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51227942]CNN is biased for the left who would have fucking guessed.[/QUOTE] Reality is biased for the left.
"Hey we have guest on here all the time who support Trump and hate Hillary, but this one guy lets cut him off because hes talking about something we do storys on daily."
[QUOTE=GunFox;51231995]Reality is biased for the left.[/QUOTE] Reality is biased for the moderate.
This election is a moderate's nightmare
Considering a mod just basically said you don't live in reality unless you are always going left, ya it's wild ride. But the clean format and funny videos always keeps me coming back.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51228638]Should we really take them seriously? Moon landing, JFK, 9/11, let's give those people some credit? No.[/QUOTE] But 9/11 was a conspiracy lol. It just wasn't a conspiracy by the US.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51234180]More like a gag order IMO. [editline]20th October 2016[/editline] I mean, today's right wing doesnt disagree with women's suffrage or race equality, they are pretty left wing when compared to the past. Political spectrum has been moving to the left since 19th century[/QUOTE] Not economically.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51234180] I mean, today's right wing doesnt disagree with women's suffrage or race equality, they are pretty left wing when compared to the past. Political spectrum has been moving to the left since 19th century[/QUOTE] I mostly poked fun at it cause it is one of those pretentious "Left = Progress" statements. Even though the left has clearly demonstrated it can be regressive lately. Also it is hilarious cause reality is probably more like you ideally want progress (typically left), but traditions (typically right) are something that still needs to be observed. Hence dealing with both in the moderate area is "reality." Also I just like to point out the obvious bias.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.