Fake News

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

You actually think that the US government should shut down Trump supporting news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the rest. I wonder if a trump adminstration shut down anti Trump news outlets like the new York Times or the Huffington Post if you wouldn't be complaining the loudest.

why does literally every reäctionary fckwit get their moral compass from dril's wise man
truly a mystery for the ages

Well I don't think that there are many people who think that HuffPo and the NYT are morally equivalent to Breitbart and Infowars. I think are plenty of people who think the former news outlets to be morally better (mostly liberals) and plenty who think the latter news outlets to be morally better (mostly conservatives). Also I'm sure there are even more who just don't know or don't have an opinion.

The point is that you'd like the government to shut down the right wing news outlets that right wingers (e.g. Breitbart, Infowars) like myself think are better but if any government shut down the left wing news outlets (e.g. HuffPo, NYT) that lefties like yourself think are better you'd probably complain wildly.

no opinion is involved. huffpo and nyt are objectively so far above breitbart and infowars in terms of factuality that they're not reasonably comparable.

Well all four are news organisations and news blogs. one of them still has a print version and the other four don't but that distinction is much less significant than it once was. As for HuffPo and NYT being objectively far above Breitbartbart and Infowars that's a matter of opinion. Its certainly not an opinion I share. Personally, like many on the right, I think Breitbart and Infowars are better.

You think that because reality has a liberal bias. Or alternatively, liberals of all stripes are generally more likely to acknowledge reality (like facts and math) than Trumpublicans.

[EnglishPete]

Wait Breitbart I understand, but Info wars? Lol. Do you believe Sandy Hook was a false flag, Bush did 9/11 and that Hillary runs a child smuggling ring out of a pizzeria? Even I don't underestimate the right enough to think they are mainstream positions for conservatives.

I don't think infowars has made any accusations about the pizza place. Infowars has on the other hand been producing some good quality journalism over the election. I wouldn't say either it or Breitbart are the best journalistic outlets (although they are both better than NYT and HuffPo).

The very best site for US journalism is Gotnews.com, Chuck Johnson and his team don't have the highest volume of output but the quality of journalism they do is second to none, certainly far far better than anything you'd find in the New York Times.

[Virginiá]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/does-facebook-stop-fake-news-232689

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[EnglishPete]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/does-facebook-stop-fake-news-232689

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Genius. Facebook will have left wing 'fact checking' organisations like Politifact 'fact check' news articles for them. Well at least Facebook are being honest about their political bias

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-25/politifact-apparently-even-facts-are-subjective-and-based-party-affiliation

[JGibson]

Wait Breitbart I understand, but Info wars? Lol. Do you believe Sandy Hook was a false flag, Bush did 9/11 and that Hillary runs a child smuggling ring out of a pizzeria? Even I don't underestimate the right enough to think they are mainstream positions for conservatives.

I don't think infowars has made any accusations about the pizza place. Infowars has on the other hand been producing some good quality journalism over the election. I wouldn't say either it or Breitbart are the best journalistic outlets (although they are both better than NYT and HuffPo).

The very best site for US journalism is Gotnews.com, Chuck Johnson and his team don't have the highest volume of output but the quality of journalism they do is second to none, certainly far far better than anything you'd find in the New York Times.

"Alt-Right" cesspools like GotNews.com, TruthFeed, True Pundit, Wesearchr, Danger and Play, The Gateway Pundit, The Conservative Treehouse, InfoWars/Prison Planet, and Breitbart have zero redeeming value for factual content or journalism standards.

[EnglishPete]

Wait Breitbart I understand, but Info wars? Lol. Do you believe Sandy Hook was a false flag, Bush did 9/11 and that Hillary runs a child smuggling ring out of a pizzeria? Even I don't underestimate the right enough to think they are mainstream positions for conservatives.

I don't think infowars has made any accusations about the pizza place. Infowars has on the other hand been producing some good quality journalism over the election. I wouldn't say either it or Breitbart are the best journalistic outlets (although they are both better than NYT and HuffPo).

The very best site for US journalism is Gotnews.com, Chuck Johnson and his team don't have the highest volume of output but the quality of journalism they do is second to none, certainly far far better than anything you'd find in the New York Times.

"Alt-Right" cesspools like GotNews.com, TruthFeed, True Pundit, Wesearchr, Danger and Play, The Gateway Pundit, The Conservative Treehouse, InfoWars/Prison Planet, and Breitbart have zero redeeming value for factual content or journalism standards.

So what's your explanation for the fact that the quality of journalism at Gotnews.com is so obviously and clearly far superior to that found on liberal propaganda sites like NYT and WaPo?

[Kingpoleon]

You actually think that the US government should shut down Trump supporting news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the rest. I wonder if a trump adminstration shut down anti Trump news outlets like the new York Times or the Huffington Post if you wouldn't be complaining the loudest.

why does literally every reäctionary fckwit get their moral compass from dril's wise man
truly a mystery for the ages

Well I don't think that there are many people who think that HuffPo and the NYT are morally equivalent to Breitbart and Infowars. I think are plenty of people who think the former news outlets to be morally better (mostly liberals) and plenty who think the latter news outlets to be morally better (mostly conservatives). Also I'm sure there are even more who just don't know or don't have an opinion.

The point is that you'd like the government to shut down the right wing news outlets that right wingers (e.g. Breitbart, Infowars) like myself think are better but if any government shut down the left wing news outlets (e.g. HuffPo, NYT) that lefties like yourself think are better you'd probably complain wildly.

no opinion is involved. huffpo and nyt are objectively so far above breitbart and infowars in terms of factuality that they're not reasonably comparable.

The NYT and Huffington Post were not objective because they were up front with their support for Hillary Clinton.

Context, man. Breitbart is comparable to Salon.

[EnglishPete]

"Alt-Right" cesspools like GotNews.com, TruthFeed, True Pundit, Wesearchr, Danger and Play, The Gateway Pundit, The Conservative Treehouse, InfoWars/Prison Planet, and Breitbart have zero redeeming value for factual content or journalism standards.

I have to say it does look very much here as though you're basing this judgment on a purely ideological test. That you think that any news outlet that is either ideologically pro the US establishment or is ideologically critical of the US establishment could be fine but that any news outlet that is ideologically critical of the US establishment from the right you are simply pre-judging to be factually and journalistically worthless without needing to know anything further about them.

Now there are two possibilities here. Either you are not operating any such ideological test and are happy to admit that its quite possible for a news outlet that is ideologically critical of the US establishment from the right to have good journalistic standards.

Or you're saying that you would judge any news outlet with such an ideological stance to be factually and journalistic worthless. If the latter is the case then your judgment of 'journalistic standards' clearly has nothing to do with journalistic standards. Such a judgment would therefore be purely ideological and could be dismissed as such.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

You actually think that the US government should shut down Trump supporting news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the rest. I wonder if a trump adminstration shut down anti Trump news outlets like the new York Times or the Huffington Post if you wouldn't be complaining the loudest.

why does literally every reäctionary fckwit get their moral compass from dril's wise man
truly a mystery for the ages

Well I don't think that there are many people who think that HuffPo and the NYT are morally equivalent to Breitbart and Infowars. I think are plenty of people who think the former news outlets to be morally better (mostly liberals) and plenty who think the latter news outlets to be morally better (mostly conservatives). Also I'm sure there are even more who just don't know or don't have an opinion.

The point is that you'd like the government to shut down the right wing news outlets that right wingers (e.g. Breitbart, Infowars) like myself think are better but if any government shut down the left wing news outlets (e.g. HuffPo, NYT) that lefties like yourself think are better you'd probably complain wildly.

no opinion is involved. huffpo and nyt are objectively so far above breitbart and infowars in terms of factuality that they're not reasonably comparable.

The NYT and Huffington Post were not objective because they were up front with their support for Hillary Clinton.

Context, man. Breitbart is comparable to Salon.

not even

[dead0man]

You think that because reality has a liberal bias. Or alternatively, liberals of all stripes are generally more likely to acknowledge reality (like facts and math) than Trumpublicans.

yep, unless Monsanto or economics are involved then facts and math fall behind feels and fear.

[EnglishPete]

You actually think that the US government should shut down Trump supporting news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the rest. I wonder if a trump adminstration shut down anti Trump news outlets like the new York Times or the Huffington Post if you wouldn't be complaining the loudest.

why does literally every reäctionary fckwit get their moral compass from dril's wise man
truly a mystery for the ages

Well I don't think that there are many people who think that HuffPo and the NYT are morally equivalent to Breitbart and Infowars. I think are plenty of people who think the former news outlets to be morally better (mostly liberals) and plenty who think the latter news outlets to be morally better (mostly conservatives). Also I'm sure there are even more who just don't know or don't have an opinion.

The point is that you'd like the government to shut down the right wing news outlets that right wingers (e.g. Breitbart, Infowars) like myself think are better but if any government shut down the left wing news outlets (e.g. HuffPo, NYT) that lefties like yourself think are better you'd probably complain wildly.

no opinion is involved. huffpo and nyt are objectively so far above breitbart and infowars in terms of factuality that they're not reasonably comparable.

The NYT and Huffington Post were not objective because they were up front with their support for Hillary Clinton.

Context, man. Breitbart is comparable to Salon.

not even

Looks to me as though you're employing a similar ideological test to JGibson, judging that news outlet whose ideological leaning is critical of the establishment from the right as being automatically without merit whilst excepting that those news outlets that ideologically lean to supporting the establishment or ideologically lean to criticising the establishment from the left can often have merit.

As I said before there are two possibilities here. Either you are not operating any such ideological test and are happy to admit that its quite possible for a news outlet that ideologically leans to criticism of the US establishment from the right to have good journalistic standards.

Or you're saying that you would judge any news outlet with such an ideological leaning to be worthless. If the latter is the case then your judgment of 'journalistic standards' clearly has nothing to do with journalistic standards, is instead purely ideological and can be dismissed as such.

[EnglishPete]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/does-facebook-stop-fake-news-232689

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Genius. Facebook will have left wing 'fact checking' organisations like Politifact 'fact check' news articles for them. Well at least Facebook are being honest about their political bias

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-25/politifact-apparently-even-facts-are-subjective-and-based-party-affiliation

Some more interesting info on Politifact the 'reliable' fact checker that Facebook is planning to use

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/12/15/9-reasons-politifact-unqualified-label-fake-news/

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Wait Breitbart I understand, but Info wars? Lol. Do you believe Sandy Hook was a false flag, Bush did 9/11 and that Hillary runs a child smuggling ring out of a pizzeria? Even I don't underestimate the right enough to think they are mainstream positions for conservatives.

I don't think infowars has made any accusations about the pizza place. Infowars has on the other hand been producing some good quality journalism over the election. I wouldn't say either it or Breitbart are the best journalistic outlets (although they are both better than NYT and HuffPo).

The very best site for US journalism is Gotnews.com, Chuck Johnson and his team don't have the highest volume of output but the quality of journalism they do is second to none, certainly far far better than anything you'd find in the New York Times.

"Alt-Right" cesspools like GotNews.com, TruthFeed, True Pundit, Wesearchr, Danger and Play, The Gateway Pundit, The Conservative Treehouse, InfoWars/Prison Planet, and Breitbart have zero redeeming value for factual content or journalism standards.

So what's your explanation for the fact that the quality of journalism at Gotnews.com is so obviously and clearly far superior to that found on liberal propaganda sites like NYT and WaPo?

That you're blind to your own biases.

[ApatheticAustrian]

this finally breaks the straw.....englishpete is a charming troll account...no offense, i like your posts.

[EnglishPete]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

Breitbart is a long way from being Nazi. Its ideological line is in fact pretty similar to that of some mainstream republican media figures like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Laura Ingraham. Now I suspect you'd probably call all of them 'Nazis' or 'alt-nazis' as well because their ideologies criticise the US establishment from the right and you seem like one of the many lefties who labels any  criticism of the establishment from the right as 'Nazi'.

However let's leave issues of semantics to one side for the moment. Is it possible for a publication that is populist nationalist and criticises the establishment from the right to be object about populist nationalism (what you would call alt Nazism)? Well clearly not. However can any publication with an ideological slant be objective about that ideological slant? Can the pro establishment liberal Washington Post be objective in its coverage of pro establishment liberalism? Well clearly not as this election and its coverage have shown.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I call them alt-Nazi because I have too much respect for actual ideological rightists to call the white nationalist movement alt-right. I could call them alt-KKK or alt-John Birch Society if you wish. Tho on second thought, not the latter. The John Birch Society, despite all it's many faults, would never have cravenly succumbed to Russian propaganda, and also almost no one remembers the John Birch Society these days beyond a few history or polisci geeks.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

My job is not to turn this place into an echo chamber.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Wait Breitbart I understand, but Info wars? Lol. Do you believe Sandy Hook was a false flag, Bush did 9/11 and that Hillary runs a child smuggling ring out of a pizzeria? Even I don't underestimate the right enough to think they are mainstream positions for conservatives.

I don't think infowars has made any accusations about the pizza place. Infowars has on the other hand been producing some good quality journalism over the election. I wouldn't say either it or Breitbart are the best journalistic outlets (although they are both better than NYT and HuffPo).

The very best site for US journalism is Gotnews.com, Chuck Johnson and his team don't have the highest volume of output but the quality of journalism they do is second to none, certainly far far better than anything you'd find in the New York Times.

http://www.vocativ.com/383939/alex-jones-infowars-erase-pizzagate-mentions/

Nice deflection thouhh. nYT is increasingly poor and HuffPo is lousy but at least neither, err, think Bush did 9/11.

Like, NYT was the first to break the Hillary email scandal. They did examine the flaws of both candidates. Breitbart was a mouthpiece for the campaign, ideologically bound to getting their chosen guy in office. Nothing wrong with an editorial slant of course, but it rather dents your idea that Breitbart is a less biased source than NYT.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

My job is not to turn this place into an echo chamber.

your job is to enforce the terms of use, which this dude and his ilk routinely blatantly violate

[Cassius]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

My job is not to turn this place into an echo chamber.

your job is to enforce the terms of use, which this dude and his ilk routinely blatantly violate

Perhaps he should start off with you, given that you regularly break the terms of service by posting false ('Hillary won Michigan giys'), defamatory ('Trump is a rapist'/'poster x is a Nazi), innaccurate (see previous), abusive ('reactionary fckwits') and vulgar ('damn') material, and by regularly calling for violations of United States law ('who's gonna kill Trump').

[EnglishPete]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

My job is not to turn this place into an echo chamber.

your job is to enforce the terms of use, which this dude and his ilk routinely blatantly violate

Which terms of use do you think I have violated and would you mind giving examples. I don't appreciate being accused of "routinely blatantly violating" the terms of use without evidence being provided for such an accusation.

 As for "my ilk" whoever that's supposed to be I'm responsible for my own posts. If you have a problems with what has been written by any herd of ilk you take it up with them.

[7,052,770]

The problem with that is a lot of Democrats as well as the Media label what ever story they don't like as "fake news". I think Pizzagate along with the Hillary e-mails are legitimate stories and not fake news.

I'm surprised that everyone just let this comment go unchallenged...

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

EnglishPete, There's no way Breitbart, the favorite platform of the alt-Nazi movement, can be considered objective about those who point out the fallacies of the alt-Nazi movement.

hey y'know if you actually did your damn job you wouldn't have to argue with this guy

My job is not to turn this place into an echo chamber.

your job is to enforce the terms of use, which this dude and his ilk routinely blatantly violate

Perhaps he should start off with you, given that you regularly break the terms of service by posting false ('Hillary won Michigan giys'), defamatory ('Trump is a rapist'/'poster x is a Nazi), innaccurate (see previous), abusive ('reactionary fckwits')

all of those are objectively true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

lmbo