RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:06 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: How to Spot Fake News
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 4:01 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 12994
inewsource.org is an independent new organization in San Diego staffed by veteran investigative reporters who provide in-depth coverage of news and provide their reports to the local PBS station as well other local TV media. One of the things they looked at was "fake news" and provided a guide to identify "fake news." Among their tips are:

- Avoid websites that end in "lo."
- Watch out for websites ending in ".com.co."
- Odd domain names
- Bad website design or us of ALL CAPS.

Steps for analyzing news sources:

1. Title/Domain Analysis: Words like ".wordpress or blogger" signifies a personal blog rather than a news source.

2. Check the website ABOUT US to learn about who is behind the website.

3. Source Analysis: Check to see if the website links to a study or source you can read.

4. Writing Style Analysis: Does the website follow the AP Style Guide or another style guide. Lack of style guide may indicate lack of editing or fact-checking process.

5. Aesthetic Analysis: Many fake and questionable new sites utilize a very bad design.

6. Social Media Analysis: Lookup the website on Facebook to see if the headlines and posts rely upon sensational or provocative language.

You can find their Alternative Facts/New Reality report at Zeroing in on Fake News

The above is an excellent guide and my method is basically determining the answers to who, what, when, where, how, and why of the source. If I'm still unsure of the source I look at the ABOUT US to see what their mission statement is as well as looking up the people listed under ABOUT US to determine the basis of their beliefs.
There are blogs that are legitimate and others that are mere opinion or propaganda sites. Rather than just posting the first website on a Google search that supports your position, like glen does, you have to determine if that website is creditable. The point is you have to analyze the blog to determine their legitimacy and the guide I posted helps you do that.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Last edited by Number6 on Sun May 27, 2018 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 10579
Ignore that advise above about blogs. Lawfareblog and SCOTUSblog are just two examples of blogs which are outstanding. There are some individual bloggers who are outstanding as well.

One of the things I do routinely is copy the second or third sentence of a questionable article and paste it into google first without quotes, and then add quotes around it. i use that to find out who is reporting the same basic news without the quotes, and who is copying another source with the quotes. That way I find out what are the days talking points too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 4:59 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 17784
Ignore that advise above about blogs. Lawfareblog and SCOTUSblog are just two examples of blogs which are outstanding. There are some individual bloggers who are outstanding as well.

One of the things I do routinely is copy the second or third sentence of a questionable article and paste it into google first without quotes, and then add quotes around it. i use that to find out who is reporting the same basic news without the quotes, and who is copying another source with the quotes. That way I find out what are the days talking points too.


It's good advice, more about domain name analysis than anything.

It's also true that self-hosted blogs or blogs with their own domain names as opposed to .wordpress.com or .blogger.com blogs aren't automatically any more legit than .wordpress or .blogger ones.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 5:19 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11807
Location: Sunny South Florida
Blogs are usually the opinions of individuals.

I think, as always, one should evaluate them for all the usual things:

Bias. However, humans are generally, speaking, biased. Bias is not a reason to reject an opinion, unless it's very distorted, skewed, extreme, or shows a utter lack of objectivity. The degree of bias matters.
Are the opinions based on verifiable facts? Are those facts shown and demonstrated?
What are the credentials, experience, credibility, and reliability of the blogger? Journalistic, academic, other kinds of expertise that relates (scientific, medical, etc.)?
What sources are they in turn relying on? Credible or not? Are they claiming info from unprovable things? (i.e. "my high level contacts in the intelligence community I cannot name".)

I think that is what separates good blogs from bad ones. I don't reject all of them, as sources. It really depends.

Pretty much, these are many of the same tests I apply to newspaper editorials, as well. Some folks with regular opinion columns at newspapers, I view as being of low credibility.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 8:30 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 12994
Ignore that advise above about blogs. Lawfareblog and SCOTUSblog are just two examples of blogs which are outstanding. There are some individual bloggers who are outstanding as well.

One of the things I do routinely is copy the second or third sentence of a questionable article and paste it into google first without quotes, and then add quotes around it. i use that to find out who is reporting the same basic news without the quotes, and who is copying another source with the quotes. That way I find out what are the days talking points too.

The point is you have to analyze the blog to determine their legitimacy and the guide I posted helps you do that. Your example is one in which you're searching to see if other reliable sources are reporting the same thing which is good. For someone who does a Google search and then posts the first website that agrees with their position, like glen does, the lack of any system to determine how reliable a source is leads to embarrassment when others point out the extreme bias of the website.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 8:43 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 12994
Blogs are usually the opinions of individuals.

I think, as always, one should evaluate them for all the usual things:

Bias. However, humans are generally, speaking, biased. Bias is not a reason to reject an opinion, unless it's very distorted, skewed, extreme, or shows a utter lack of objectivity. The degree of bias matters.
Are the opinions based on verifiable facts? Are those facts shown and demonstrated?
What are the credentials, experience, credibility, and reliability of the blogger? Journalistic, academic, other kinds of expertise that relates (scientific, medical, etc.)?
What sources are they in turn relying on? Credible or not? Are they claiming info from unprovable things? (i.e. "my high level contacts in the intelligence community I cannot name".)

I think that is what separates good blogs from bad ones. I don't reject all of them, as sources. It really depends.

Pretty much, these are many of the same tests I apply to newspaper editorials, as well. Some folks with regular opinion columns at newspapers, I view as being of low credibility.

If you're reading a column on the editorial pages then you should expect the column to reflect the opinion of the writer. If you're reading an article in a newspaper or a magazine then the story should tell you the who, what, when, where, how, and why of the story's subject. Normally, when reading a newspaper we're already familiar with the credibility of that publication. However, on a website that's not well known then we have to analyze that website to determine their credibility. Sometimes it's as easy as recognizing the hyperbolic wording or more difficult as following/reading the links within the story as well checking to see if that same information is appearing in other reputable websites. Taking a website at face value isn't enough, it takes effort on the reader's part to ensure what they're reading is accurate.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 9:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11807
Location: Sunny South Florida
Concur with those points. Some people on the Internet enjoy its lack of gatekeeping. I just find, as a reader, it makes me do my own. Whatever, it's a skill worth developing.

To be clear on one thing, what I meant by newspaper editorials were opinions by writers in the opinion section, not staff editorials.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 9:59 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 12994
I've Googled sites to find a source to support my opinion but when I find a site and start examining it, especially when I've never heard of it, I have to stop and analyze the site to see if it's one I'd find credible. Believe it or not, I've often had to skip linking a site that supported my opinion because I couldn't trust the website.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 10:45 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:27 pm
Posts: 8293
Location: miles from nowhere
How to spot fake news?

Fox
Breitbart
World Net Daily

Just as examples.

Anything that spills from Donald Trump's so-called mind.

_________________
bird's theorem-"we the people" are stupid.

"No one is so foolish as to choose war over peace. In peace sons bury their fathers, in war fathers bury their sons." - Herodotus

The new motto of the USA: Unum de multis. Out of one, many.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2018 7:56 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm
Posts: 16324
How to Spot Fake News?

When it comes out of FOXNEWS or anybody in the Trump administration or the Trump business organization.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2018 1:07 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 17565
Location: The blue parts of the map
Fake news is often clickbait. The links go to sites which are supposed to look like the product of known and respected news agencies. For example, there's one called "ABC" which tries to look like ABC News.

99 times out of 100, they don't try hard enough. I don't know if it really is simply bad design, or if they can't get any closer without copyright issues.

There is also the Weekly World News test. You know, that's the market tabloid that makes it up and doesn't pretend not to. The test is that, if it sounds unbelievable, there's a maybe 75% chance that you're right not to believe it. Some of the excesses WWN does are also used (less blatantly) by those who do pretend it's true. One problem here: right now, a lot of the real news sounds like stuff that would have been in the fake news 3 years ago. What I do now is look for corroboration by international news agencies with good reps. Those run a lot of crap too, but their hard news is usually fairly accurate on hard facts.

Yet another good test is the sources of quotes. If everyone is quoting the same story, then it's either single-source news or fake news. More checking is needed on single-source news. Who's THEIR source? Primary? Secondary? Etc. It might feel like researching a history Ph.D..

_________________
We used to hang our traitors. Now we elect them to lead us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2018 2:02 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17527
Anything that does not fit the liberal mindset

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2018 4:16 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 17784
Anything that does not fit the liberal mindset


You're the only person here who has trouble with sourcing, but there's a remedy for that.

Put some effort into your links, learn how to judge sources for bias. It takes effort and willingness to learn. Being liberal has nothing to do with it. For all his flaws, that white nationalist ridiculous bigot Col. at least knew how to source things properly.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Last edited by carmenjonze on Tue May 29, 2018 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2018 4:25 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm
Posts: 16324
Anything that does not fit the liberal mindset


So glen...where shall I tune in to avoid fake news? Thrill me with your acumen.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2018 6:51 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 12994

So glen...where shall I tune in to avoid fake news? Thrill me with your acumen.

For fake news, read glen's posts.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 6:13 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3701
often it is in how a story is told.

In America's news headlines, Palestinians die mysterious deaths

Quote:
Moustafa Bayoumi
Judging by some stories, it’s almost as if bullets just hang in the air, waiting for Palestinians to walk deliberately into them

It is the peculiar fate of oppressed people everywhere that when they are killed, they are killed twice: first by bullet or bomb, and next by the language used to describe their deaths. A common condition of oppression, after all, is to be blamed for being the victim, and that blame gets meted out in language designed to rob the oppressed of their very struggle.

Such a situation has for decades been the tragic destiny of the Palestinians, who are themselves so routinely assigned the blame when they are killed by Israel – and not just by the Israeli government but by the American media and political establishment – that we have now basically come to expect it.

But we don’t have to accept it. By paying close attention to the language of the media, we can see how this double death of the oppressed occurs, and we can learn how to resist such an insidious way of framing the Palestinian struggle.

Consider the headlines. On Monday, the Israeli military killed more than 60 protesters in Gaza. The deadly violence was one-sided – no Israelis were killed – and disproportionate. In the midst of the carnage, the New York Times sent out a tweet about its story on the bloody events. “Dozens of Palestinians have died in protests as the US prepares to open its Jerusalem Embassy,” read the tweet.

Have died? Really? We should note how the virtually passive voice in this tweet hides the one performing the action, which is exactly what passive voice constructions can do. In this tweet, Israel is assigned no responsibility for killing protesters. On the contrary, Palestinians appear, simply and almost mysteriously, to "have died"..................

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 8:35 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:31 pm
Posts: 3838
American journalism which includes NYT is not reliable. I don't trust any of them. Stories and narratives have a life far from reality that kills the truth.

I suggest to not trust anything really. You have to think and judge on your own.

Do you really think CNN is to be trusted. No. That is why Trump can say they are fake news. That is why government has no accountability. American media as a whole is NOT a check on governmental power.

Five filters of the media.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34LGPIXvU5M

To summarize, I will just go into my usual rant about the media::

Given the situation we are in with Trump doing willy nilly, resistance, as necessary as it is, is difficult without reliable information to guide us. Thus, most of us are all splintered and frustrated while we sit sucking our thumbs waiting to find out what happens next on the news. Politically alienated, there is an air of despair and not much of anything else except a trust in our own determination. That is not a healthy state for the country.

If you find my perspective is too pessimistic, tell me so, because I have been feeling like this for a long time.

_________________
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_8wdvTjq8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 9:03 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11807
Location: Sunny South Florida
That is why Trump can say they are fake news.


He admitted the basis of that tactic a while ago.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... media.html

60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl revealed an off-camera conversation about the media and his use of "fake news" she had with then-candidate Donald Trump when she interviewed him for the newsmagazine show after he won the Republican nomination.

Stahl said in an interview with PBS News' Judy Woodruff that Trump told her he keeps hammering the press so that when they write negative stories no one will believe them.

LESLEY STAHL: It's just me, my boss, and him -- he has a huge office -- and he's attacking the press. There were no cameras, there was nothing going on and I said, 'That is getting tired, why are you doing it? You're doing it over and over and it's boring. It's time to end that, you've won the nomination. And why do you keep hammering at this?'
And he said: 'You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.'

[snip][end]

I choose not to aid him in this tactic ... the devaluation of all truth, the project of gaslighting. It only serves his purposes.

Quote:
If you find my perspective is too pessimistic, tell me so, because I have been feeling like this for a long time.


I am neither alienated nor splintered.

I agree sometimes the nature of our current media ecology is you have to work a bit to be sure about reliable information ... but not that it is so impossible to determine.

Sticking to one single source exclusively is tunnel vision, don't care how Good it is Man ... sometimes you need data collected from a variety of perspectives and paradigms, but we've had this discussion.

I meet with members of my political party, you may have heard of them, the Democrats, from time to time, and we talk about resisting, elections, and doing stuff. Sometimes, even over pizza and beer.

You asked.

I guess I can't work you out of your pessimism by telling you I don't share it, but I don't.

I agree the more perfect Union is in a very bad historical moment, closer to dictatorship than it's been in a while, but I also see lots of people fighting back, in all the ways they can.

I'm with Jor-El. The people just need some light to show them the way.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Last edited by ProfessorX on Wed May 30, 2018 9:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 9:08 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:29 am
Posts: 3726
How to Spot Fake News????

Like this



search.php?keywords=trolling&terms=all&author=glenfs&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

_________________
Sent from Majesty's iPhone using Forum Runner

Why would someone born in Hawaii have a CT SSI number?


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 31, 2018 6:12 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3701

He admitted the basis of that tactic a while ago.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... media.html

60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl revealed an off-camera conversation about the media and his use of "fake news" she had with then-candidate Donald Trump when she interviewed him for the newsmagazine show after he won the Republican nomination.

Stahl said in an interview with PBS News' Judy Woodruff that Trump told her he keeps hammering the press so that when they write negative stories no one will believe them.

LESLEY STAHL: It's just me, my boss, and him -- he has a huge office -- and he's attacking the press. There were no cameras, there was nothing going on and I said, 'That is getting tired, why are you doing it? You're doing it over and over and it's boring. It's time to end that, you've won the nomination. And why do you keep hammering at this?'
And he said: 'You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.'

[snip][end]

I choose not to aid him in this tactic ... the devaluation of all truth, the project of gaslighting. It only serves his purposes.



I am neither alienated nor splintered.

I agree sometimes the nature of our current media ecology is you have to work a bit to be sure about reliable information ... but not that it is so impossible to determine.

Sticking to one single source exclusively is tunnel vision, don't care how Good it is Man ... sometimes you need data collected from a variety of perspectives and paradigms, but we've had this discussion.

I meet with members of my political party, you may have heard of them, the Democrats, from time to time, and we talk about resisting, elections, and doing stuff. Sometimes, even over pizza and beer.

You asked.

I guess I can't work you out of your pessimism by telling you I don't share it, but I don't.

I agree the more perfect Union is in a very bad historical moment, closer to dictatorship than it's been in a while, but I also see lots of people fighting back, in all the ways they can.

I'm with Jor-El. The people just need some light to show them the way.


The light bearer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOXN8fWQo8M

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:27 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:31 pm
Posts: 3838
And now, it is time to begin the expanded edition of "How to Spot Fake News."

The following are a sample of recent news to examine why American media is lost among Fake News.

Cable News Largely Ignores Deaths of 4,645 in Puerto Rico to Focus on Roseanne
https://www.democracynow.org/2018/5/31/ ... n_roseanne

We are busy with Trump Blurbs of the day.

Quote:
In related news, the cable news networks are facing criticism for spending far more time covering the Roseanne story than the stunning new Harvard report that found at least 4,645 people died in Puerto Rico due to Hurricane Maria. That figure is 70 times higher than the official death toll. According to Media Matters, the main cable news networks covered Roseanne for over 10 hours on Tuesday and Wednesday morning. They covered Hurricane Maria’s death toll in Puerto Rico for just over 30 minutes. Fox News spent just 48 seconds covering the Puerto Rico story. On Wednesday San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz posted a message on Twitter reading, “Never forgotten! Never again!” In an attached photo, she was wearing a hat with the number 4,645.


News must consistently keep politically correct dialog.

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/18/the ... lege-free/

Quote:
ONE OF THE most controversial proposals put forward by Sen. Bernie Sanders during the 2016 presidential campaign was a pledge to make tuition free at public colleges and universities. Critics from both parties howled that the pie-in-the-sky idea would bankrupt the country. Where, after all, would the money come from?

Those concerns were brushed aside Monday night, as the Senate overwhelmingly approved an $80 billion annual increase in military spending, enough to have fully satisfied Sanders’s campaign promise. Instead, the Senate handed President Donald Trump far more than the $54 billion he asked for. The lavish spending package gives Trump a major legislative victory, allowing him to boast about fulfilling his promise of a “great rebuilding of the armed services.”

...

Or with $80 billion a year, you could make public colleges and universities in the U.S. tuition-free. In fact, Sanders’s proposal was only estimated to cost the federal government $47 billion per year.


And there is no disappearing black hole needed for this story:

LSD Treatments Can Actually 'Harmonise' The Brain, Study Shows
Huge finding for treating mental disorders!

https://www.sciencealert.com/lsd-psyche ... -harmonics

Quote:
Now a new study has revealed exactly what's going on inside our brains when we take LSD, uncovering a connection that might explain why it relieves the symptoms of disorders such as PTSD and chronic depression.

Research led by the Center for Brain and Cognition at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona has discovered a process of 'harmonising' across areas of the brain that don't usually work together.

Referred to by the team as 'repertoire expansion', it suggests psychedelic substances like LSD could be encouraging the brain to develop certain patterns of activity.

The team thinks these patterns could help compensate the disordered connections that can cause mental suffering.


https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/171699/ ... rst-scans/

Quote:
The findings, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), reveal what happens in the brain when people experience the complex visual hallucinations that are often associated with LSD state. They also shed light on the brain changes that underlie the profound altered state of consciousness the drug can produce.

Dr Carhart-Harris explained: "Normally our brain consists of independent networks that perform separate specialised functions, such as vision, movement and hearing - as well as more complex things like attention. However, under LSD the separateness of these networks breaks down and instead you see a more integrated or unified brain.

"Our results suggest that this effect underlies the profound altered state of consciousness that people often describe during an LSD experience. It is also related to what people sometimes call 'ego-dissolution', which means the normal sense of self is broken down and replaced by a sense of reconnection with themselves, others and the natural world. This experience is sometimes framed in a religious or spiritual way - and seems to be associated with improvements in well-being after the drug's effects have subsided."


Image

Surveying the news outlets in America makes it hard to distinguish between News and just a story.

_________________
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_8wdvTjq8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:44 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 17784
And now, it is time to begin the expanded edition of "How to Spot Fake News."

The following are a sample of recent news to examine why American media is lost among Fake News.

Cable News Largely Ignores Deaths of 4,645 in Puerto Rico to Focus on Roseanne
https://www.democracynow.org/2018/5/31/ ... n_roseanne

We are busy with Trump Blurbs of the day.


They're not just blurbs. This person is conducting national policy from Twitter. I think that's a bad idea; most people think it's a bad idea. But thanks to third party voters such as yourself, who fall for what Jill Stein tells you, we find ourselves in this situation with this kind of person as president.

Quote:
News must consistently keep politically correct dialog.

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/18/the ... lege-free/


What does so-called political correctness have to do with a story about military spending and free public college? To make sense, what you say here could use a connecting idea.

Quote:
And there is no disappearing black hole needed for this story:

LSD Treatments Can Actually 'Harmonise' The Brain, Study Shows
Huge finding for treating mental disorders!

https://www.sciencealert.com/lsd-psyche ... -harmonics



https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/171699/ ... rst-scans/



Image

Surveying the news outlets in America makes it hard to distinguish between News and just a story.


No, it doesn't. It's still pretty easy if you know what distinguishes actual journalism and bona fide research from bullcrap. And to be perfectly honest, I don't think you're the right person to be giving expanded editions on how to distinguish fake news from actual news. You post from like two sources: The Intercept, and Democracy Now.

As for this LSD/sciencealert.com link you reference, it goes to a site that immediately yells at you: "Our system thinks you might be a robot! We're really sorry about this, but it's getting harder and harder to tell the difference between humans and bots these days." Going directly to https://www.sciencealert.com gives the same result.

Maybe it's hard for them, but as far as best practices for user experience (UX) goes, this is a really stupid implementation to put on every story and right on the front page of one's website, and it reeks of paranoia.

What in the world is sciencealert.com? And what does LSD have to do with this thread? Are you still tripping on LSD?

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11807
Location: Sunny South Florida
The story of the exceptionally high hurricane deaths in Puerto Rico made the news because it was a Harvard study. BTW, make of this what you wish, but these allegations had been around for a while, Harvard saying so basically turned it into a news story that got more attention. It would be hard to argue it wasn't covered. I saw it several times on two forms of media, broadcast and print, aside from the Internet.

I think the story of the government's misallocated spending priorities isn't exactly news. I would say since about 1945 we have been spending too much on the military and that much of that spending could be reallocated for a variety of civilian social programs. Higher education is a priority I would emphasize, for even more than self interested reasons. If I dare say, it was news before fans of Bernie Sanders noticed it to be true.

The research on LSD's effects on the brain are not new. Here's an article on those recent experimental findings from January in New Scientist.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/21 ... py-effect/

I personally think it is way overdue that the DEA move LSD, psilocybin, DMT, and many other psychedelics out of Schedule I, as the fact that these drugs are scientifically mis-classified, is becoming increasingly clear. They do not meet any Schedule I criteria (lack of legitimate medical purposes, level of risk).

I'd move them off the schedule, but for chrissakes, at least put them in Schedule III or IV so scientific research with them becomes more feasible and easier to do for academics.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:10 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 17784
American journalism which includes NYT is not reliable. I don't trust any of them. Stories and narratives have a life far from reality that kills the truth.

I suggest to not trust anything really. You have to think and judge on your own.

Do you really think CNN is to be trusted. No. That is why Trump can say they are fake news. That is why government has no accountability. American media as a whole is NOT a check on governmental power.

Five filters of the media.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34LGPIXvU5M


Nor is Al Jazeera. We've been over this before viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19246 , but this Five Filters of the Media video that you occasionally post has an Al Jazeera watermark.

Al Jazeera is Qatari/Qatari Royals/Qatari state television. It's a journalistic organization. But like Democracy Now, it is one with a bias that is plain as day.

AJ's deep pockets via the Qatari Royals are a key to understanding Al Jazeera and related organizations' high production values and inroads into the American left.

Quote:
To summarize, I will just go into my usual rant about the media::

Given the situation we are in with Trump doing willy nilly, resistance, as necessary as it is, is difficult without reliable information to guide us. Thus, most of us are all splintered and frustrated while we sit sucking our thumbs waiting to find out what happens next on the news. Politically alienated, there is an air of despair and not much of anything else except a trust in our own determination. That is not a healthy state for the country.

If you find my perspective is too pessimistic, tell me so, because I have been feeling like this for a long time.


I don't find it to be too pessimistic, I agree with you that the state of our country is not healthy. I do find it to be nihilistic and determinist, though. I also think that nihilist determinism is a luxury afforded to those who can afford it, and that doesn't include anyone I know.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11807
Location: Sunny South Florida
There is the issue of the occasionally sketchy way AJ deals with climate change, for example, but you might expect that from a network largely funded by a petro-state.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], marindem and 26 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group