RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:01 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:26 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 16137
https://twitter.com/jedshug/status/1117979993936748545


https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-confli ... me-1396435



When you wonder why I am ENRAGED constantly




Quote:
Here they go again.

Attorney General William Barr is already under fire for his March letter to Congress, which reported the results of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation in a way many feel was mostly beneficial to President Donald Trump.

Now, Democrats are taking aim at Barr’s recent congressional testimony in which he slipped in his opinion that federal law enforcement officials may have “spied” on his boss’ successful presidential run.

But if that wasn’t enough, some experts argue that Barr’s previous work in the private sector could conflict with his continuing supervision of the investigation into Russian tampering in the 2016 election campaign.

Why? A few of Barr’s previous employers are connected to key subjects in the probe. And some argue that, even if Barr didn’t break any rules, his financial ties to companies linked to aspects of the Russia investigation raise questions about whether he should—like his predecessor, Jeff Sessions—recuse himself.

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6376
You keep using Twitter as a source. With this level of accusation, I'm hoping you can find a better source.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ilhan-om ... 08cf3ccing

_________________
On July 2, 2019 Ike Wrote, "I know quite a few Jew hating alleged Democrats who would never vote for a Jew socialist for President." When asked for proof, Ike failed to provide it. Proof Ike.....Proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:27 pm 
Online
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Posts: 3080
Location: Oregon
You keep using Twitter as a source. With this level of accusation, I'm hoping you can find a better source.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ilhan-om ... 08cf3ccing

Twitter isn't a person, nor is it a "political site," nor a "news site." When we use a Tweet as a source of information, it's dependent on the TWEETER, not Twitter itself. Obviously, we can shove aside any of Donald Trump's tweets, but if say, Dan Rather tweeted information with citations, it's as good as a proper news site.

_________________
Trump spelled “Al Queda” as “Alcaida.” He is not OKayda. –Bette Midler (although Bette misspelled it too, but she's not POTUS.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:35 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 14238
Location: Sunny South Florida
I will note, though, that it can be hard to make thorough detailed citations, at least according to academic standards, with only 280 characters to work with.

But yes, as twitter is just a medium, the issue is really the credibility of the user, not per se the medium itself.

There seem to be some folks who think it's a good method for essaying - Seth Abramson comes to mind. But, dunno, personally, if you don't want to break up a detailed argument into a cascade of 50 tweets, maybe you should use a message board.

Just saying. :D

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:43 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6376
Twitter isn't a person, nor is it a "political site," nor a "news site." When we use a Tweet as a source of information, it's dependent on the TWEETER, not Twitter itself. Obviously, we can shove aside any of Donald Trump's tweets, but if say, Dan Rather tweeted information with citations, it's as good as a proper news site.


The few times I have seen something that or may not interesting. I use that information for larger google search. I do not trust Twitter as a single source.

_________________
On July 2, 2019 Ike Wrote, "I know quite a few Jew hating alleged Democrats who would never vote for a Jew socialist for President." When asked for proof, Ike failed to provide it. Proof Ike.....Proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 5:05 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 13796

The few times I have seen something that or may not interesting. I use that information for larger google search. I do not trust Twitter as a single source.

Trusting Twitter as a source is like trusting Alex Jones as a source.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 5:21 pm 
Online
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Posts: 3080
Location: Oregon
Trusting Twitter as a source is like trusting Alex Jones as a source.

Huge difference between Twitter and Infowars. One is a conspiracy, nut job site, while the other is simply a medium, like Prof said, that anyone can employ. Vet the tweeter, not Twitter itself. Twitter says nothing, it is not a person, nor does it stand for any person or group.

_________________
Trump spelled “Al Queda” as “Alcaida.” He is not OKayda. –Bette Midler (although Bette misspelled it too, but she's not POTUS.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 5:29 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6376
Huge difference between Twitter and Infowars. One is a conspiracy, nut job site, while the other is simply a medium, like Prof said, that anyone can employ. Vet the tweeter, not Twitter itself. Twitter says nothing, it is not a person, nor does it stand for any person or group.


Twitter is hardly a reliable source, especially as a single source. Especially with accusation being made. Better sourcing is needed in such a story.

_________________
On July 2, 2019 Ike Wrote, "I know quite a few Jew hating alleged Democrats who would never vote for a Jew socialist for President." When asked for proof, Ike failed to provide it. Proof Ike.....Proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:08 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 14238
Location: Sunny South Florida
Many people do cite sources in their tweets. I agree with Roy on this point.

Much stuff on Twitter is unsourced, and is therefore essentially the repetition of rumors; that criticism is valid, but not universal.

As Roy pointed out, Dan Rather tweets stuff on twitter. Just because he is using Twitter doesn't make him now unreliable.

If it's a person you don't know, but they are citing the NYT as the source of their tweet ... then you should assess the source.

But I agree, if the person is unknown and the source is not given, there is no way IN THAT CASE to assess the credibility.

Anyway, Lib's SECOND link is from Newsweek, not just Twitter, and the story is worth reading. I'll repost it.

Should William Barr Recuse Himself From Mueller Report? Legal Experts Say Attorney General's Ties to Russia Are Troubling
https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-confli ... me-1396435

This much is known: On Barr’s public financial disclosure report, he admits to working for a law firm that represented Russia’s Alfa Bank and for a company whose co-founders allegedly have long-standing business ties to Russia. What’s more, he received dividends from Vector Group, a holding company with deep financial ties to Russia.

[snip][end]

Seems to be at least a perceived conflict of interest here.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:33 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 16137
You keep using Twitter as a source. With this level of accusation, I'm hoping you can find a better source.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ilhan-om ... 08cf3ccing

the SOURCE is IN the TWEET and I also put that source in post look again please

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:34 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 16137
Trusting Twitter as a source is like trusting Alex Jones as a source.

The source is IN THE POST next to the tweet link where the SOURCE is also listed

newsweek

I cant help it if people dont know how to read a tweet

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:34 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 16137
Many people do cite sources in their tweets. I agree with Roy on this point.

Much stuff on Twitter is unsourced, and is therefore essentially the repetition of rumors; that criticism is valid, but not universal.

As Roy pointed out, Dan Rather tweets stuff on twitter. Just because he is using Twitter doesn't make him now unreliable.

If it's a person you don't know, but they are citing the NYT as the source of their tweet ... then you should assess the source.

But I agree, if the person is unknown and the source is not given, there is no way IN THAT CASE to assess the credibility.

Anyway, Lib's SECOND link is from Newsweek, not just Twitter, and the story is worth reading. I'll repost it.

Should William Barr Recuse Himself From Mueller Report? Legal Experts Say Attorney General's Ties to Russia Are Troubling
https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-confli ... me-1396435

This much is known: On Barr’s public financial disclosure report, he admits to working for a law firm that represented Russia’s Alfa Bank and for a company whose co-founders allegedly have long-standing business ties to Russia. What’s more, he received dividends from Vector Group, a holding company with deep financial ties to Russia.

[snip][end]

Seems to be at least a perceived conflict of interest here.



that link is in the tweet and i posted the newsweek link in the post a bunch of old men who dont know how to read a fucking tweet'
not you, prof

fuck it, I ALWAYS post tweets that have LEGIT sources IN THE TWEET, I do it for a service to people, that service is now over

if not always surely 98% of the time

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 8:00 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 13796
The source is IN THE POST next to the tweet link where the SOURCE is also listed

newsweek

I cant help it if people dont know how to read a tweet

I was responding to maridem's post, not yours. Twitter is for Twits.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 8:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6376
The source is IN THE POST next to the tweet link where the SOURCE is also listed

newsweek

I cant help it if people dont know how to read a tweet


Then it begs the question, why did you not go to Newsweek in the first damn place

You have history of using Twitter as a source, which is not exactly a reliable means of gathering information

_________________
On July 2, 2019 Ike Wrote, "I know quite a few Jew hating alleged Democrats who would never vote for a Jew socialist for President." When asked for proof, Ike failed to provide it. Proof Ike.....Proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:01 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 6376


that link is in the tweet and i posted the newsweek link in the post a bunch of old men who dont know how to read a fucking tweet'
not you, prof

fuck it, I ALWAYS post tweets that have LEGIT sources IN THE TWEET, I do it for a service to people, that service is now over


if not always surely 98% of the time


Whenever I see you posting from Twitter, I ignore it. TWITTER IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE.

Yes, the link was in whatever twitter does, but why didn't you just go to Newsweek in the first?

I do not trust twitter, never have and never will. Find better sourcing.

_________________
On July 2, 2019 Ike Wrote, "I know quite a few Jew hating alleged Democrats who would never vote for a Jew socialist for President." When asked for proof, Ike failed to provide it. Proof Ike.....Proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:03 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 14238
Location: Sunny South Florida
fuck it, I ALWAYS post tweets that have LEGIT sources IN THE TWEET, I do it for a service to people, that service is now over


OK. Lib, here's my suggestion to ya.

I personally don't care but we clearly have two people who do.

If you see a story link in a twitter feed ... just post the story link. Don't even mention it came from twitter.

*I* don't care and it really should be unnecessary ... but anyway.

Bottom line is you ARE correct in this case ... the story is from Newsweek, and has a valid journalistic source.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:03 pm 
Online
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Posts: 3080
Location: Oregon

Whenever I see you posting from Twitter, I ignore it. TWITTER IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE.

Yes, the link was in whatever twitter does, but why didn't you just go to Newsweek in the first?

I do not trust twitter, never have and never will. Find better sourcing.

No one is asking you to trust Twitter. Twitter is NOT the source of its tweets, the people who tweet are. TWITTER is not the source, the TWEETER is. I read tweets from people like Barack Obama and Neal DeGrass Tyson. I read them because they are written by their authors, NOT Twitter. Avoid mixing up Twitter with its contributors.

Yes, IGNORE Trump's tweets. But why ignore tweets by people you trust?

_________________
Trump spelled “Al Queda” as “Alcaida.” He is not OKayda. –Bette Midler (although Bette misspelled it too, but she's not POTUS.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:59 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 13796

OK. Lib, here's my suggestion to ya.

I personally don't care but we clearly have two people who do.

If you see a story link in a twitter feed ... just post the story link. Don't even mention it came from twitter.

*I* don't care and it really should be unnecessary ... but anyway.

Bottom line is you ARE correct in this case ... the story is from Newsweek, and has a valid journalistic source.

When Lib posted on the thread about the Russians working with Bernie he provided a Twitter link. marindem and I challenged Twitter as a source he stated there's a link in the Tweet to the Washington Post. That's the main basis of why marindem and I complained about his using Twitter as a source. Having to search a Tweet for a link is a waste of people's time when the actual source could have been linked in the first place. I'll give Lib credit, he did respond and provide a link to the Washington Post.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:50 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 20761

Twitter is hardly a reliable source, especially as a single source. Especially with accusation being made. Better sourcing is needed in such a story.


This isn't how Twitter works.

Twitter isn't a source and is not supposed to be a source. It is a microblogging social messaging platform. Think of Blogger or Wordpress.com, but just limited to 240 characters. Those are not sources, they are platforms.

As Roy said, the tweeter is the source to check, not twitter.com. So dismissing a tweet isn't due dilligence, it's a misunderstanding of what Twitter is and does.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.


MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMMM...MMMM...mmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:52 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 20761

Whenever I see you posting from Twitter, I ignore it. TWITTER IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE.

Yes, the link was in whatever twitter does, but why didn't you just go to Newsweek in the first?

I do not trust twitter, never have and never will. Find better sourcing.


Twitter is not a source, the tweeter is the source.

Twitter is the platform. You can find tons of reliable sources on this platform. Every bona fide journalist and news source in the country is on it. They are reliable sources. Twitter is just the social media platform they deliver their sourced material on.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.


MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMMM...MMMM...mmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:54 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 20761
When Lib posted on the thread about the Russians working with Bernie he provided a Twitter link. marindem and I challenged Twitter as a source he stated there's a link in the Tweet to the Washington Post. That's the main basis of why marindem and I complained about his using Twitter as a source.

Twitter is not a source.

Twitter is a social messaging platform.

Quote:
Having to search a Tweet for a link is a waste of people's time when the actual source could have been linked in the first place. I'll give Lib credit, he did respond and provide a link to the Washington Post.


Not if you know what Twitter is, and how to use it. It actually cuts down on a lot of wasted time, which is part of its value.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.


MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMMM...MMMM...mmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:21 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 20761
Many people do cite sources in their tweets. I agree with Roy on this point.

Much stuff on Twitter is unsourced, and is therefore essentially the repetition of rumors; that criticism is valid, but not universal.

As Roy pointed out, Dan Rather tweets stuff on twitter. Just because he is using Twitter doesn't make him now unreliable.

If it's a person you don't know, but they are citing the NYT as the source of their tweet ... then you should assess the source.



Quote:
There seem to be some folks who think it's a good method for essaying - Seth Abramson comes to mind. But, dunno, personally, if you don't want to break up a detailed argument into a cascade of 50 tweets, maybe you should use a message board.

Just saying. :D

Dunno if you're active on academic Twitter, but others may not know that people write entire sourced essays on Twitter. People first scoffed at the very idea of "Twitter essays," but if you're active on Twitter, they are typically the real deal.

There are also additional tools that will consolidate such essays into a more traditionally readable form, such as Threadreader. I've referenced Threadreader on RFL, which in turn can be cited in any kind of MLA/Chicago/APA/ASA, etc. citation standard.

Example: viewtopic.php?p=428574#p428574 from the Conservative Civility thread.

This is the on-Twitter essay: https://twitter.com/studentactivism/sta ... 1540655106

This is what is called a Threadreader unroll. Anyone can tag @threadreaderapp with the "unroll" command, and Threadreader will send it to the thread as another comment.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1007 ... 55106.html

Another really good example is the #HATM hashtag tonight (Historians at the movies). Tonight, episodes 3 and 4 of Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s Reconstruction aired. The series is packed to the gills with historians, mainly academics. Some writers and independent scholars but overwhelmingly academics. Most of the people consulted and interviewed in Reconstruction are on Twitter and also showed up tonight on #HATM and #ReconstructionPBS in kind of a live-watch party. It was fun to observe them last week when the series started.

RL Barnes out of Princeton History put up this killer Twitter essay earlier in the day in prep for the episodes (she was a consultant on the series)

https://twitter.com/DigitalHistory_/sta ... 7620213760

Anybody in the world literally on Planet Earth following #ReconstructionPBS could follow it. I think this is what some of our friends around here don't get about Twitter: this is information you don't have to wait 4 years to come out in book or journal form. And it's all sourced and verifiable. I learned a ton just from this one Twitter essay, and this is one of "my" subjects.

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.


MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMM...MMM...mmm.

MMMM...MMMM...mmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:47 am 
Offline
Policy Wonk

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:01 pm
Posts: 1303
Location: Home of the DFL
So it depends on how "we the people" use the twitform? We're fucked.

_________________
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. - Will Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:07 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 16137
Jesus fucking christ, climate change is killing us, putin rump are destroying us, I post a tweet and AS USUAL in the TWEET is a link to the source and THAT is what we are arguing about

fucking no wonder we are so FUCKED

thanks to those who respond to support my position, I wish you didnt have to waste your time...chalk it up to people who dont really understand social media and how it works...

BY THE WAY that story is NOT seen or READ by hardly ANYONE unless it is in a TWEET that is picked up by message boards, other tweets, etc.

TWITTER is WHY we see most of what we see now...and yet some of you are STILL Arguing about it...amazing

What i do NOT do and have either NEVER done or RARELY is post a link to a tweet that has no source behind it...if that is what I was doing, your argument would make sense, but that is NOT what I am doing or have done at least the VAST majority of the time.

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 12:31 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19118
Location: The blue parts of the map
The source does not stand up to academic rigor, and the means of delivery is not the reason. As Carmen said, you can do completely footnoted and sourced essays on twitter. The Web was invented at CERN for physicists to exchange just that, though as single HTML documents, not strung out threads. (The original HTML was maybe 1/1000 as complex as HTML5 with active scripting and css.)

In this case the story is easy to check out for yourself, because it's been all over the Nooz that Barr like the rest of this bunch has money in the Russia kleptocratic game. The Nooz is obviously not a rigorous source either, but typically it at least points you to one.

_________________
"If it were up to John [Bolton], we'd be in four wars now." --President Donald J. Trump, May 2019


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group