The News Thread

[Einherjar86]

That fucker’s gotta go.

 

[CiG]

Did either of you even read that study cited by the Daily Wire? Did you compare the language of the article with the language of the study?

Not sure why I'm being addressed here. I didn't post any links nor did I talk at length about any links that were posted by others.

I don’t think it’s a massive revelation that lots of journalists outside of financial reporting “lean left”; but that doesn’t translate into media bias at the scale of corporate power and communications. News conglomerates are companies, and they have no financial interest in promoting left-wing economic values or models. Although certain journalists evince political biases, that doesn’t mean these translate into deep-seeded left-wing bias with media corporations themselves.

Well sure, as we've been seeing recently, they have no financial interest in promoting progressive economics (even you implied Bernie wants to destroy everything rather than work within the system like Warren, something I disagree with but a popular sentiment) but they absolutely have a financial interest in promoting liberal economics, which can and often does translate to a Democratic bias.

But the study doesn’t say that these ideological affiliations bias their reporting; of anything, it claims that desire to maintain access to industry insiders biases them to publish positive stories.

This is a very weasel-worded take, and I can't believe you're this naive.

That fucker’s gotta go.

The Black Caucus in Alabama has endorsed Bloomberg. Won't be long before he takes Biden's position as the black/old school Dem choice for POTUS.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Apparently Bloomberg has spent more money in < 3 months than Hillary Clinton spent on her entire general election campaign.

and yet he doesn't even have the balls to show up to one of the debates. And the funny part is his supporters are all like "he doesn't need to, UMPF!" like he's some kind of baller who's going to stroll in and take the nomination.

Did either of you even read that study cited by the Daily Wire? Did you compare the language of the article with the language of the study?

For starters, the study isn’t about liberal bias across the media but about specifically financial journalists working with large financial industries. It does state that about 50% of all financial journalists claim to “lean left,” with about 30% moderate and the remaining conservative. But the study doesn’t say that these ideological affiliations bias their reporting; of anything, it claims that desire to maintain access to industry insiders biases them to publish positive stories.

Second, I don’t think it’s a massive revelation that lots of journalists outside of financial reporting “lean left”; but that doesn’t translate into media bias at the scale of corporate power and communications. News conglomerates are companies, and they have no financial interest in promoting left-wing economic values or models. Although certain journalists evince political biases, that doesn’t mean these translate into deep-seeded left-wing bias with media corporations themselves.

Finally, the Rasmussen polls aren’t actually about journalists’ biases but about what voters perceive as media bias. As I think is clear based on some of the posts here, bias and facts aren’t mutually exclusive; one can present facts in a biased manner. The Daily Wire article is an example of facts presented in a biased manner.

...................

gotta admit the L at least

 

[Einherjar86]

Not sure why I'm being addressed here. I didn't post any links nor did I talk at length about any links that were posted by others.

I’m sorry, you liked the post so I assumed that meant you approved the content.

Well sure, as we've been seeing recently, they have no financial interest in promoting progressive economics (even you implied Bernie wants to destroy everything rather than work within the system like Warren, something I disagree with but a popular sentiment) but they absolutely have a financial interest in promoting liberal economics, which can and often does translate to a Democratic bias.

I assume you mean neoliberal economics, which are free-market economics blown up to the global, multinational scale. No?

This is a very weasel-worded take, and I can't believe you're this naive.

I’m sorry, this is what it says. I’m not sure how I’m being weasel-y about anything. You’re accusing me of being naive, but as far as I can tell I’m paying more attention to details here than anyone else.

The Black Caucus in Alabama has endorsed Bloomberg. Won't be long before he takes Biden's position as the black/old school Dem choice for POTUS.

Money talks. Go capitalism.

...................

Yeah I don’t know what this means

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Not sure why I'm being addressed here.

oh don't mind him, it's just his "obsession of responding to all of my posts" ...... i'm sure he missed a day or two of sleep because of that one post.

 

[Einherjar86]

oh don't mind him, it's just his "obsession of responding to all of my posts" ...... i'm sure he missed a day or two of sleep because of that one post.

I never sleep during the day. I have a life.

 

[CiG]

and yet he doesn't even have the balls to show up to one of the debates. And the funny part is his supporters are all like "he doesn't need to, UMPF!" like he's some kind of baller who's going to stroll in and take the nomination.

I didn't actually know he refused to do the debates.

I find it funny that the same people who despise Tulsi and treat her like a traitor are championing this cunt who has only been a Dem since 2018. They love to say party loyalty is very important ("bErNiE iSn'T a DeMoCrAt") but hey buddy give Bloomberg a chance he's changed and he pledged to be a lifelong Democrat in 2018 and he's gonna get shit done.

The Democratic Party is the most disgusting and hilarious joke in existence. Bloomberg recently claimed he's a champion of women in the workplace, watch CNN/MSNBC talking heads try and defend him right after they recently jumped on the whole Bernie is a sexist train. 100% the MSM is the enemy of the people.

I assume you mean neoliberal economics, which are free-market economics blown up to the global, multinational scale. No?

Yes, the economics of establishment Dems.

 

[Einherjar86]

Yes, the economics of establishment Dems.

It’s actually the economics of Reaganite conservatism.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

 

[CiG]

It’s actually the economics of Reaganite conservatism.

Okay? Obama said his policies were akin to an 80's Repub moderate. Economic policy is one of the few areas the Dems and Repubs heavily crossover and find common ground. It's not an either/or situation mate.

 

[Einherjar86]

Okay? Obama said his policies were akin to an 80's Repub moderate. Economic policy is one of the few areas the Dems and Repubs heavily crossover and find common ground. It's not an either/or situation mate.

Totally agree; but it’s funny that conservative voters who champion Reagan utterly fail to realize that neoliberal economics was his creation. His vision was the dawn of 21st-century globalism.

My frustration arises from the fact that conservative voters accuse the mainstream media of being biased toward democrats when the economic model on which its existence is premised came straight from Reagan and Thatcher.

Finally, it’s a total illusion to think someone like Trump is any different from an establishment democrat or establishment republican. The only difference is that rather than being a politician who’s benefited from neoliberalism, he’s a businessman who’s benefited from it. In my opinion, that’s even less trustworthy than an establishment politician.

 

[CiG]

The corporate class is filled with scumbags, Trump being one of them, but for me it's not even a competition for who is worst or least trustworthy. Establishment politicians manufacture wars and then sell the situation to businesses so they can profit off wars. It's like comparing a pimp to a john.

My frustration arises from the fact that conservative voters accuse the mainstream media of being biased toward democrats when the economic model on which their existence is premised came straight from Reagan and Thatcher.

I agree there's some irony there but much less than I think you want there to be. I'm no fan of Reagan or Maggie but they were conservative and so even though their methods of capitalism might appeal to profit-seekers, the socio-political angle of their politics doesn't. The Dems are the chief exporters of IdPol in America so of course corporations who want to make money but not at the expense of their branding in the modern era aren't going to privilege the party of Reagan, they're going to privilege the party of #FirstBlackPresident and #FirstWomanPresident (womp womp).

Do you also think it's ironic when every corporation during Pride Month starts shilling rainbow consumerism, because neoliberalism is a Reagan thing?

 

[CiG]

Calling it now, Hilldawg will be Bloomberg's VP pick if he wins the nom.

 

[Einherjar86]

The corporate class is filled with scumbags, Trump being one of them, but for me it's not even a competition for who is worst or least trustworthy. Establishment politicians manufacture wars and then sell the situation to businesses so they can profit off wars. It's like comparing a pimp to a john.

The market manufactures wars as much as, if not more than, politicians do. Politicians carry out the market’s marching orders. War sells, and private companies profit. War can hurt the stock market, but it doesn’t hurt the fossil fuel companies.

Can’t respond to anything else now, I’m enjoying a weekend in Savannah.

 

[CiG]

Well hopefully Warren can get elected and change the system from within, because she understands it all so well.

 

[Einherjar86]

We can only hope.

 

[CiG]

Don't lump me in with you, I'd never be retarded enough to support Pocahontas.

 

[CiG]

First coronavirus death in Europe, with more than 69,000 cases globally.

 

[Einherjar86]

This is a good piece: https://orionmagazine.org/article/united-in-change/

I didn’t look like most of the people I met in my travels. The red maps led me to white, rural counties, places that went overwhelmingly for a president who has referred to climate change as a “hoax,” “stupid,” and “nonsense.” But these are also places where the implications of a warming world aren’t speculative. Many I met work intimately with the land—the peach farmer waiting for cold winter nights, the dryland rancher waiting for spring rains, the West Virginia cop worrying over river rise. The louder voices in climate activism may come from blue coastal states, but the red states are arguably paying the greater cost of impacts now, today.

Most everyone I sought out had voted for Mr. Trump, though few spoke with the rage that sears our scorched social media landscape. What I experienced, standing with people in their home places, were humans hamstrung by the polarization of an issue that no longer has anything to do with atmospheric chemistry. I met people hindered from even uttering the phrase “climate change,” even as they lost the very things that defined their lives: the surety of spring rains, ripe peaches in mid-July, snow in a Wisconsin winter. But I set out not to lecture, but listen. I’d had it with hashtagged conversations of either political persuasion. I went to listen, because the partisan divide that was once a rift had suddenly grown into a chasm, and I was no longer strong enough to shout across it. The more I spoke of climate change, in my life and in my work, the more the temperatures seemed to rise, above us and between us. The schism was growing, and it was clear how catastrophically facts, on their own, can fail. So I went searching for stories instead.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Men-only barbershop defends decision to kick woman out: 'This is people getting offended because they can'

 

[Einherjar86]

Buttigieg is such a snake.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/15/poli...y-support-pete-buttigieg-president/index.html

After touting Keegan-Michael Key's support for Pete Buttigieg, the campaign told CNN later Saturday that the actor will now appear at the Buttigieg campaign events simply to encourage early voting and voter registration -- not officially endorse the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor as the Democratic candidate for president.