Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    10 Dec '16 15:37
    “Fake news” hysteria hinges on the laughable assumption that corporate-run media has a divine monopoly on “facts”

    http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-fake-news-hysteria-hinges-on-laughable-assumption-monopoly-on-facts.html
  2. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    10 Dec '16 15:56
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    “Fake news” hysteria hinges on the laughable assumption that corporate-run media has a divine monopoly on “facts”

    http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-fake-news-hysteria-hinges-on-laughable-assumption-monopoly-on-facts.html
    Actually there is no "hysteria" and the existence of fake news and its increased use is based on the willingness of its producers to spread lies and misinformation and the willingness of people like you to believe those lies and misinformation if it serves your ideological agenda.
  3. Standard memberHandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    At the edge
    Joined
    23 Sep '06
    Moves
    18031
    10 Dec '16 16:05
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Actually there is no "hysteria" and the existence of fake news and its increased use is based on the willingness of its producers to spread lies and misinformation and the willingness of people like you to believe those lies and misinformation if it serves your ideological agenda.
    Fake news for fake brains.
  4. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    10 Dec '16 17:23
    Originally posted by HandyAndy
    Fake news for fake brains.
    So you are denying this story? Seems more like your dead brain to me.
  5. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    10 Dec '16 17:24
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Actually there is no "hysteria" and the existence of fake news and its increased use is based on the willingness of its producers to spread lies and misinformation and the willingness of people like you to believe those lies and misinformation if it serves your ideological agenda.
    Sure, and CNN is honestly reporting. You should watch some of the videos before you jump to conclusions
  6. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    10 Dec '16 17:37
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    Sure, and CNN is honestly reporting. You should watch some of the videos before you jump to conclusions
    I never watch CNN or any of the cable networks so I wouldn't know.

    Anyway, the argument that "someone else does X [X being something "bad"] so why can't I" is expected of a child but not a supposed presenter of facts.
  7. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    10 Dec '16 18:40
    We'll see what happens if the lawsuit results.

    Libtards are of course too blinded by ideology to see they are being played.
  8. Standard memberHandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    At the edge
    Joined
    23 Sep '06
    Moves
    18031
    10 Dec '16 19:28
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    So you are denying this story? Seems more like your dead brain to me.
    Befuddled maybe, but not dead yet. And functioning well enough to see that the story is total garbage.
  9. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56296
    10 Dec '16 20:47
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    “Fake news” hysteria hinges on the laughable assumption that corporate-run media has a divine monopoly on “facts”

    http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-fake-news-hysteria-hinges-on-laughable-assumption-monopoly-on-facts.html
    Utter rubbish.

    Do some research.
    If CNN, the BBC and Al Jazeera report something, and the only news outlets reporting the opposite are blogs, hate-sites and affiliated Pushers of agendas... in 99.9% of the cases, the main news outlets are reliable.

    If these "alternative" news sites report something, research it. Is it backed up by other sources (check the language to see if it looks like they're all getting their information from the same source though), check Reuters and the BBC (if both carry a story from multiple sources, give up), check John Pilger (or other independant award winning journalists).

    Not rocket science.
    Check things.

    Now look at the source you just gave. What can you find which backs it up?
    Form an opinion, don't embrace one.

    There you go. The cheques in the post.
  10. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    65528
    10 Dec '16 21:01
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Utter rubbish.

    Do some research.
    If CNN, the BBC and Al Jazeera report something, and the only news outlets reporting the opposite are blogs, hate-sites and affiliated Pushers of agendas... in 99.9% of the cases, the main news outlets are reliable.

    If these "alternative" news sites report something, research it. Is it backed up by other sources (che ...[text shortened]... hich backs it up?
    Form an opinion, don't embrace one.

    There you go. The cheques in the post.
    All news is biased shav, (that includes CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera) and that's exactly as it should be.

    The alternative is to control the news and then you'd see some real North Korean type bias.
  11. Standard memberHandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    At the edge
    Joined
    23 Sep '06
    Moves
    18031
    10 Dec '16 21:29
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    All news is biased shav, (that includes CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera) and that's exactly as it should be.
    I feel sorry for you if you really believe that.
  12. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    10 Dec '16 21:43
    Originally posted by HandyAndy
    I feel sorry for you if you really believe that.
    Which is why you are a libtard. You believe what the establishment wants you to believe. It is a common problem among those raised in a time when the country was much less evil, at least on the surface.
  13. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Dec '16 21:46
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Utter rubbish.

    Do some research.
    If CNN, the BBC and Al Jazeera report something, and the only news outlets reporting the opposite are blogs, hate-sites and affiliated Pushers of agendas... in 99.9% of the cases, the main news outlets are reliable.

    If these "alternative" news sites report something, research it. Is it backed up by other sources (che ...[text shortened]... hich backs it up?
    Form an opinion, don't embrace one.

    There you go. The cheques in the post.
    After what has been CLEARLY evidenced over this last election cycle, anyone who is so lacking in discernment as to mention CNN and journalism in the same sentence--- unless in contrast--- is a complete idiot.
    The MSM has proven conclusively and without equivocation that any product of its efforts is not to be trusted.

    You do some research, tool.
  14. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    11 Dec '16 08:372 edits
    Originally posted by HandyAndy
    Fake news for fake brains.
    Actually that would be you and the news outlets you supported. For example during the Presidential campaign you parroted the lie that the wikileaks Podesta emails were doctored forgeries, a lie perpetrated by the Clinton campaign and various news outlets like MSNBC. This despite the fact that email authenticity can be tested, as was demonstrated to you. You continued to perpetrate this lie without a shred of credible substantiating evidence. Baked news for baked brains.

    Clinton camp chief strategist @benensonj: "I've seen things" in Wikileaks emails "that aren't authentic" #ThisWeek https://t.co/LPQJBfACqz
    — This Week (@ThisWeekABC) October 23, 2016

    Joe, Malcolm Nance & other experts have validated these emails have been forged & altered by Russia before passing them off to Wikileaks! https://t.co/gZ7rVQ6JJp
    — VLB (@BickiDoodle) October 27, 2016

    The media (@ABC, @CBSNews, @NBCNews and @PBS) must heed Malcolm Nance: "You should have ZERO CONFIDENCE in the contents" of Wikileaks dumps!
    — Thomas Gordon (@EarthOrb) October 23, 2016

    Joy now discussing WikiLeaks with security expert Malcolm Nance who says we can have zero confidence in authenticity of documents. #AMJoy
    — LaurenBaratzLogsted (@LaurenBaratzL) October 22, 2016

    Infact it seems that those who are decrying fake news are the ones most guilty of fabricating it.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-10/hard-core-clinton-fanatic-manufactured-viral-fake-news-msnbc-used-discredit-wikileak
  15. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56296
    11 Dec '16 08:46
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    After what has been CLEARLY evidenced over this last election cycle, anyone who is so lacking in discernment as to mention CNN and journalism in the same sentence--- unless in contrast--- is a complete idiot.
    The MSM has proven conclusively and without equivocation that any product of its efforts is not to be trusted.

    You do some research, tool.
    Harping on about bollocks again, are we?
    Taking one part of a whole sentence and acting like that's the full sentiment your kicking against... again.

    You complete waste of Oxygen.
Back to Top