Originally posted by Zymologist
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
House Intel votes to release FISA memo...
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostWell being that the likes of you and MM are so stupid as to swallow whatever Fox news, Breitbart, and the like feed you, instead of checking out the facts I'll waste some more of my time and try to help you out.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...trump-goes-0-3
You just cannot make stuff like this up.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAnd there folks we once again see the world's entire supply of irony meters explode. Don't believe what those lying god-for-nothing sources say, take a look at The TRUTH™ -- which you can find on Rachel Maddow's blog
You just cannot make stuff like this up.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zymologist View PostI was going to edit your quote to add a strikethrough of Republican and replace it with Russian, but then I realized that they're pretty much the same thing anyway.
247tc4.jpg
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View Post
She's as nutty as those people who say Neil Armstrong never walked on the moon.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
So... it's basically the "Ignore the man behind the curtain" spin that I predicted. She doesn't dispute any of the facts. On the contrary, she describes the story with reasonable accuracy but then suddenly says, "Never mind all of that. Look at this shiny object over here!" and morons like Jimmy go, "Ooooh! It's pretty!"Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostThere is zero rationale for why any particular site is included in their hit list; they merely describe them collectively in highly disparaging terms.
For a source to be labeled as junk news it must fall in
at least three of the following five domains:
• Professionalism: These outlets do not employ
the standards and best practices of professional
journalism. They refrain from providing clear
information about real authors, editors,
publishers and owners. They lack transparency,
accountability, and do not publish corrections on
debunked information.
• Style: These outlets use emotionally driven
language with emotive expressions, hyperbole,
ad hominem attacks, misleading headlines,
excessive capitalization, unsafe generalizations
and fallacies, moving images, graphic pictures
and mobilizing memes.
• Credibility: These outlets rely on false
information and conspiracy theories, which they
often employ strategically. They report without
consulting multiple sources and do not employ
fact-checking methods. Their sources are often
untrustworthy and their standards of news
production lack credibility.
• Bias: Reporting in these outlets is highly biased
and ideologically skewed, which is otherwise
described as hyper-partisan reporting. These
outlets frequently present opinion and
commentary essays as news.
• Counterfeit: These outlets mimic professional
news media. They counterfeit fonts, branding
and stylistic content strategies. Commentary and
junk content is stylistically disguised as news,
with references to news agencies, and credible
sources, and headlines written in a news tone,
with bylines, date, time and location stamps.
Sources of junk news were evaluated and reevaluated
in a rigorously iterative coding process. A
team of 12 trained coders, familiar with the US
political and media landscape, labeled sources of
news and information based ...
Allow me to suggest that reading the methodology should probably come before posting characterizations of the methodology, but it's been three days, so I'm sure you've corrected this by now.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo... it's basically the "Ignore the man behind the curtain" spin that I predicted. She doesn't dispute any of the facts. On the contrary, she describes the story with reasonable accuracy but then suddenly says, "Never mind all of that. Look at this shiny object over here!" and morons like Jimmy go, "Ooooh! It's pretty!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by lao tzu View Postv.
For a source to be labeled as junk news it must fall in
at least three of the following five domains:
• Professionalism: These outlets do not employ
the standards and best practices of professional
journalism. They refrain from providing clear
information about real authors, editors,
publishers and owners. They lack transparency,
accountability, and do not publish corrections on
debunked information.
• Style: These outlets use emotionally driven
language with emotive expressions, hyperbole,
ad hominem attacks, misleading headlines,
excessive capitalization, unsafe generalizations
and fallacies, moving images, graphic pictures
and mobilizing memes.
• Credibility: These outlets rely on false
information and conspiracy theories, which they
often employ strategically. They report without
consulting multiple sources and do not employ
fact-checking methods. Their sources are often
untrustworthy and their standards of news
production lack credibility.
• Bias: Reporting in these outlets is highly biased
and ideologically skewed, which is otherwise
described as hyper-partisan reporting. These
outlets frequently present opinion and
commentary essays as news.
• Counterfeit: These outlets mimic professional
news media. They counterfeit fonts, branding
and stylistic content strategies. Commentary and
junk content is stylistically disguised as news,
with references to news agencies, and credible
sources, and headlines written in a news tone,
with bylines, date, time and location stamps.
Sources of junk news were evaluated and reevaluated
in a rigorously iterative coding process. A
team of 12 trained coders, familiar with the US
political and media landscape, labeled sources of
news and information based ...
Allow me to suggest that reading the methodology should probably come before posting characterizations of the methodology, but it's been three days, so I'm sure you've corrected this by now.Last edited by One Bad Pig; 02-09-2018, 08:16 PM.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostYou got that right. I have found that it's hardly worth my time knowing the block heads i'm dealing with.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostObviously you didn't read the article. There's no shiny object MM. The fact of the matter is that both the Democrat, Warner, and the Republican, R. Burr, respective chairs of the Senate investigation, attempted to meet with and interview R. Steele. The fake news site that feeds your thought mechanism, i.e. Fox News, put their spin on it, and like the dumb sheep that you are, you just ate it up the way Fox et. al. have you trained to do. It's an investigation you dolt!Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostAllow me to inform you that I had read the methodology prior to posting, applied such methodology to, i.e., the Patriot Post ...
... and determined that, whatever their jargon, they're not nearly as unbiased as they pretend.
Analysis requires measures, and, while the need to be highly specific in describing those measures, as in any math-based field, does result in a technical vocabulary that can be sadly opaque to outsiders, it's inappropriate to label this language, dismissively, as "jargon."
Heck, given their definitions, the Patriot Post doesn't even fail the bias test; it is biased (like pretty much every other source out there), but it is hardly guilty of presenting commentary or opinion as news.
Thanks for checking. They presented their methodology, but neglected to provide their scoring or rationale (which is what I meant by "zero rationale") for any particular site on their list. I'm not familiar with 90% of the sites they list, and probably for good reason; I'd avoid a good deal of them from name alone.
There doesn't appear to be any reporting on the site at all, aside from a headline tracker filled with links to other sites on the list, echoing the study's findings.
#notallstories
But enough. It's junk news, piglet.
But frankly, this is just data. Used with care, just about any data can be useful. Rasmussen polls, for example, can't be used for absolute measures, but when compared to themselves, are perfectly acceptable in showing trends.
One of the more compelling outstanding questions in the past election was the impact of Russian influence exerted through social media. We know from Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, which have remained remarkably bipartisan, unlike others we might mention in the House, (and I hope you appreciate the unshortened url's, because they're slow torture when editing), that there were 36,000 Russian bots loose on Twitter, just for instance.
It would be good to know how much of a threat this capability poses to our next elections. The numbers of accounts and bots mean nothing if we can't relate them to their impact on targeted constituencies. CPRP can't do that, but it can help identify constituencies that are more susceptible to targeting.
That would be useful.
Comment
-
Uh-oh...
The "Clinton operatives" in question were "long-time Clinton operative Sidney Blumenthal" and journalist Cody Shearer who has close personal and professional ties to the Clintons.
And liberals are still trying to pretend that the dossier is legitimate, independent, and unbiased intelligence work.Last edited by Mountain Man; 02-10-2018, 10:17 AM.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, Yesterday, 10:43 PM
|
0 responses
19 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by eider
Today, 03:16 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
24 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
56 responses
235 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 06:20 AM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 04-14-2024, 02:07 PM
|
48 responses
294 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 05:46 AM
|
||
Started by Starlight, 04-14-2024, 12:34 AM
|
11 responses
87 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-15-2024, 10:57 AM
|
Comment