MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 https://theconservativetreehouse.com Seriously Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 3,950 Posted January 14, 2019 Honestly, I think that you just need to read from different sources. I usually look at MSN/CNN and then look at the same story from Fox News (or vice-versa). If there is commonality, then I feel like I am getting the right story. If there is disagreement I use my own judgment. This. Google news does a good job of aggregating the same story from multiple sources so I can check out multiple points of view. it's unfortunate to have to say that a news article has a "point of view" but there's no denying stories are slanted based upon who is reporting it so reading it from multiple sources is often the only way to get the whole story. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 #1 NYT They DO lead the nation in retractions they have to print about Trump. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted January 14, 2019 #1 NYT They DO lead the nation in retractions they have to print about Trump. At least they DO corrections. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 At least they DO corrections. This guy gets it. Filthy gets his top secret news on the Orange Messiahs battle against the Deep State from Q Anon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 At least they DO corrections. SOME corrections do not make up for knowingly creating stories based on lies. Never forget.........in early 2017 they had the UNREDACTED (classified) FISA application on Carter Page. Every story since then concerning Russian Collusion/Obstruction of Justice was purely fiction since they know the truth. The latest narrative they're pushing is that FBI started investigation into Trump AFTER Comey was fired. #1 NYT They do lead the nation in spreading false news stories. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted January 14, 2019 This. Google news does a good job of aggregating the same story from multiple sources so I can check out multiple points of view. it's unfortunate to have to say that a news article has a "point of view" but there's no denying stories are slanted based upon who is reporting it so reading it from multiple sources is often the only way to get the whole story. You'll never get the "full story" from watching/reading any of these outlets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted January 14, 2019 This guy gets it. Filthy gets his top secret news on the Orange Messiahs battle against the Deep State from Q Anon. Filthy gets his news from a site that hates Qanon. Proving that you've never been on that site despite the gay emoticon responses you post every time that site is mentioned. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 Filthy gets his news from a site that hates Qanon. Proving that you've never been on that site despite the gay emoticon responses you post every time that site is mentioned. Casual Observer is here. Can we get a Bronx Narrowback sighting? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 #1 NYT They did lead the nation in journalists that were being PAID by Fusion GPS Washington Post and Yahoo get honorable mentions in that category. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,172 Posted January 14, 2019 NYT? Cmon man... I just googled to find the older link about their managing editor doing a mea culpa about their left bias, and stumbled onto this recent article saying similar stuff. The NYT is a lefty rag, please stop using them as a bastion of equality. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-n-y-times-editor-rips-trump-coverage-as-biased A former executive editor of the New York Times says the paper’s news pages, the home of its straight-news coverage, have become “unmistakably anti-Trump.” Jill Abramson, the veteran journalist who led the newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says the Times has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility. In a soon-to-be published book, “Merchants of Truth,” that casts a skeptical eye on the news business, Abramson defends the Times in some ways but offers some harsh words for her successor, Dean Baquet. And Abramson, who was the paper’s only female executive editor until her firing, invoked Steve Bannon’s slam that in the Trump era the mainstream media have become the “opposition party.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “Though Baquet said publicly he didn’t want the Times to be the opposition party, his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump,” Abramson writes, adding that she believes the same is true of the Washington Post. “Some headlines contained raw opinion, as did some of the stories that were labeled as news analysis.” What’s more, she says, citing legendary 20th century publisher Adolph Ochs, “the more anti-Trump the Times was perceived to be, the more it was mistrusted for being biased. Ochs’s vow to cover the news without fear or favor sounded like an impossible promise in such a polarized environment.” Abramson describes a generational split at the Times, with younger staffers, many of them in digital jobs, favoring an unrestrained assault on the presidency. “The more ‘woke’ staff thought that urgent times called for urgent measures; the dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards,” she writes. Trump claims he is keeping the “failing” Times in business—an obvious exaggeration—but the former editor acknowledges a “Trump bump” that saw digital subscriptions during his first six months in office jump by 600,000, to more than 2 million. Former executive editor of the New York Times Jill Abramson. Former executive editor of the New York Times Jill Abramson. “Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative: they drove big traffic numbers and, despite the blip of cancellations after the election, inflated subscription orders to levels no one anticipated.” The Times has long faced accusations of liberal bias, even before Trump got into politics and became its harshest critic. But Abramson’s words carry special weight because she is also a former Times Washington bureau chief and Wall Street Journal correspondent specializing in investigative reporting. Baquet has said that Trump’s attacks on the press are “out of control” and that it is important to use the word “lie” when the president tells a clear untruth. In “Merchants of Truth: The Business of News and the Fight for Facts,” Abramson praised as “brave and right” Baquet’s decision to run this headline when Trump abandoned his birtherism attacks on Barack Obama: “Trump Gives Up a Lie But Refuses to Repent.” Abramson, who had her share of clashes with Baquet when he was her managing editor, sheds light on a 2016 episode when Baquet held off on publishing a story that would have linked the Trump campaign with Russian attempts to influence the election. Liz Spayd, then the Times public editor, wrote that the paper, which concluded that more evidence was needed, appeared “too timid” in not running the piece, produced by a team that included reporter Eric Lichtblau. Baquet “seethed” at this scolding, Abramson says, and emailed Lichtblau: “I hope your colleagues rip you a new a*****e.” Baquet wrote that “the most disturbing thing” about Spayd’s column “was that there was information in it that came from very confidential, really difficult conversations we had about whether or not to publish the back channel information. I guess I’m disappointed that this ended up in print. “It is hard for a journalist to complain when confidential information goes public. That’s what we do for a living, after all. But I’ll admit that you may find me less than open, less willing to invite debate, the next time we have a hard decision to make.” Lichtblau soon left the Times for CNN, where he was one of three journalists fired when the network retracted and apologized for a story making uncorroborated accusations against Trump confidante Anthony Scaramucci. And the Times soon abolished the public editor’s column. Abramson is critical of Trump as well. She calls his “fake news” attacks a “cheap way of trying to undermine the credibility of the Times’s reporting as something to be accepted as truth only by liberals in urban, cosmopolitan areas.” The Times, which broke the story of Hillary Clinton’s private email server, also “made some bad judgment calls and blew its Clinton coverage out of proportion,” Abramson writes. She says Clinton “was wary of me,” mishandled the scandal and “was secretive to the point of being paranoid.” Abramson is candid in acknowledging her faults. When then-publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. was considering promoting her to the top job, he told her over lunch at Le Bernadin: “Everyone knows there’s a good Jill and a bad Jill. The big question for me is which one we’ll see if you become executive editor.” She admitted to him that “I could be self-righteous when I felt unheard, I interrupted, I didn’t listen enough.” It was a heated battle with Baquet that led to her ouster in 2014. He was furious upon learning that she was trying to trying to recruit another top journalist—Abramson says an executive ordered her to keep it secret—who would share the managing editor’s title. Sulzberger called her in, fired her, and handed her a press release announcing her resignation. Abramson says she replied: “Arthur, I’ve devoted my entire career to telling the truth, and I won’t agree to this press release. I’m going to say I’ve been fired.” Her final judgment: “I was a less than stellar manager, but I also had been judged by an unfair double standard applied to many women leaders.” 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,631 Posted January 14, 2019 Google news. It dips from all sources. Presumably just as likely to get Fox News as You are USA today or The Guardian for example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam90sbaby 2,120 Posted January 14, 2019 Google news. It dips from all sources. Presumably just as likely to get Fox News as You are USA today or The Guardian for example. Thats not how Google works. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 3,455 Posted January 14, 2019 Is there any place a guy can read the real focking news? Not just propaganda pieces? I tried BBC America, but they seem to run a lot of the same headlines as CNN. BBC is the only place where you can hope to get non-propaganda that I am aware of Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 Google news. It dips from all sources. Presumably just as likely to get Fox News as You are USA today or The Guardian for example. Google stop filtering results that help Trump and boost against Trump yet? Hint: You can't prove that either way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kanil 519 Posted January 14, 2019 Is this the thread were we all post the news sources we agree with as 100% credible and any other sources as completely biased propaganda machines? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 Is this the thread were we all post the news sources we agree with as 100% credible and any other sources as completely biased propaganda machines? Yes. The NYT is a partisan hit rag but Conservative Treehouse is fair and balanced and Q Anon is a deep state double agent. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted January 14, 2019 Casual Observer is here. Can we get a Bronx Narrowback sighting? Can we get Paul to run an IP check, please? You're as bad at this as Worms was. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,591 Posted January 14, 2019 I was born in Queens Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/425178-former-fbi-official-says-nyt-report-is-indicator-of-bureau-employees-working Former FBI official says NYT report shows FBI operated outside of DOJ guidelines (i.e. biased) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 Can we get Paul to run an IP check, please? You're as bad at this as Worms was. Im even worse. Im never going anywhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted January 14, 2019 Im even worse. Im never going anywhere. I'm sure one day you'll get moved off lettuce and work a register. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted January 14, 2019 Filthy gets his news from a site that hates Qanon. Proving that you've never been on that site despite the gay emoticon responses you post every time that site is mentioned.mdc sucks at being right about anything Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493 Posted January 14, 2019 I'm sure one day you'll get moved off lettuce and work a register. Pretty sure he works in the Bakery Dept. He's the one that gleefully asked for a mold of ShoNuff's c@ck in one of the other threads so he could use it to bake a cake. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 14, 2019 More gay Sho Nuff stuff. What is it with this guy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
avoiding injuries 1,220 Posted January 14, 2019 Ive built my own personalized network of news through Twitter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493 Posted January 15, 2019 More gay Sho Nuff stuff. What is it with this guy? Your the one that asked for it. :Shrug: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmmmm...beer 691 Posted January 15, 2019 One of my biddies said Rueters https://mobile.reuters.com And low and behold... it may be as close as I'll get to neutral at a glance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,631 Posted January 15, 2019 One of my biddies said Rueters https://mobile.reuters.com And low and behold... it may be as close as I'll get to neutral at a glance. Pfft, not one story about Kim K having a 4th baby... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
