CNN Exposed
- Thread starter VBR
- 27 comments
- 1,412 views
- Status
UKMikey
Premium
- 18,086
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
CNN is biased against Trump? This is a stunning revelation. Now, if only we had a dedicated thread for media bias. Then maybe we could compare this to another fear mongering news operation with a mission to depose a sitting president. Surely that would be fair and balanced?
(We could even talk about how Ronald Reagan's removal of the FCC Fairness Doctrine led to the rise of fact free entertainment "journalism" channels designed to rile up their viewership for clicks and giggles.)
tl;dr:
(We could even talk about how Ronald Reagan's removal of the FCC Fairness Doctrine led to the rise of fact free entertainment "journalism" channels designed to rile up their viewership for clicks and giggles.)
tl;dr:
Yawn...
Last edited:
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
Thank you for posting a bunch of Project Veritas videos explaining “the truth”.
I mean, as if we didn’t know already.
Any moderator should feel free to rename this, “The Irony Thread”. The “pot calling the kettle” thread is also acceptable. I can think of others but they’re probably all against the AUP.
I mean, as if we didn’t know already.
Any moderator should feel free to rename this, “The Irony Thread”. The “pot calling the kettle” thread is also acceptable. I can think of others but they’re probably all against the AUP.
Last edited:
- 7,765
- Yorkshire
- ScapeGoat4U
- WhippingBoy
- 6,963
- South Africa
I didn't check the videos on the OP (not enough free time) but out of curiosity, I did click on the...
I laughed so hard at this:
Dunno why this reminded me of one certain former US President, whom I presume is currently lying on his bed in a golf resort in Florida, munching on McDs.
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
Oh yeah, roll your eyes. Because I'm the one who can't take a privately funded organization with ties to far right fringe groups and has a history of making misleading, cleverly edited videos, that attempt to purposely mislead their audience and spread disinformation and has been successfully sued, all at face value. I mean, sure, why shouldn't we believe Project Veritas. They obviously have an agenda that you want to spread so it doesn't matter if they lie, it doesn't matter if they spread falsehoods, as long as they convey a message YOU want to believe in, other people are being "illogical" if they don't subscribe to the same kool-aid drinking, crack pot, conspiracy ********. Right?
Are you telling me that news can have, BIAS? God, we need to tell The Sun, the Daily Mail and the Guardian about this!
- 13,859
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Because propaganda videos are just as likely to be true as reporting from the AP, right?
Time is not unlimited. You posted 30 minutes of video with only the most rudimentary summary, of course people are going to make judgments of whether it's worth the time based on the source. If you think otherwise, maybe spend more than eight words convincing them that it's a valuable use of their time. Because lets be honest, your username isn't exactly screaming "reliable source of unbiased information" either.
Last edited:
- 477
- United Kingdom
Unsure if this is a wind up or not.
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
I really don't understand why some of you are in this thread..? Did @GTP Red Pill @youguys so you can come here to be as insulting and off topic as you can possibly be? He's not forcing you to "waste" your time watching the videos and he's not forcing you to care. You can also make your own thread about Fox News or whatevernewsnetwork being biased or fearmongering.
GTP is full off threads discussing topics I don't care about and I don't go in those threads to insult the OP and derail the conversation. There is also an ignore function on GTP you can use when certain members annoy you. Try using it. I have it on for some members and it's great.
btw: I'm not saying you're not allowed to do what you're doing. I'm not the boss of anything. I'm just wondering why some of you always do this? Why can't we have on-topic civil conversations with people we agree and disagree with on GTP? Everything is hostile in the Opinions & Current Events threads.
GTP is full off threads discussing topics I don't care about and I don't go in those threads to insult the OP and derail the conversation. There is also an ignore function on GTP you can use when certain members annoy you. Try using it. I have it on for some members and it's great.
btw: I'm not saying you're not allowed to do what you're doing. I'm not the boss of anything. I'm just wondering why some of you always do this? Why can't we have on-topic civil conversations with people we agree and disagree with on GTP? Everything is hostile in the Opinions & Current Events threads.
Last edited:
UKMikey
Premium
- 18,086
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Conversations require two participants. I don't think the OP has had a conversation since he first posted on this forum. In the absence of two way communication, threads tend to drift away from their initial purpose.
If anyone feels that off topic posts are a distraction from this thread being as much of a safe space for CNN-bashing posts as it was perhaps intended to be, however, there's a report link in the top right corner of every reply which can be used to alert the administration staff here at GTPwhom I'm sure could do with a good laugh.
If anyone feels that off topic posts are a distraction from this thread being as much of a safe space for CNN-bashing posts as it was perhaps intended to be, however, there's a report link in the top right corner of every reply which can be used to alert the administration staff here at GTP
Last edited:
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
I think @UKMikey already answered this. People who start threads posting a few videos without comment are not trying to discuss anything. They aren't trying to engage. They aren't likely interested in debate. It's, lean over, and let me pour this elixer into your ear so you know how to think, mentality. And it just doesn't work here. The internet has enough people with an agenda trying to push off propaganda.
If @GTP Red Pill really wanted to start a discussion about CNN's bias, which it clearly has, he's free to post and discuss it in the Spot the Media Bias thread. But he may not like the push back he gets and likely isn't accustomed to when people start questioning his sources.
- 19,626
- Alabamamania
In other news, Water is Wet.
CNN: It's Raining Cats and Dogs
MSNBC: Reign Continues, still No Tax Returns
Local News: Some Rain Today (please click in our affiliate links which have nothing to do with any possible news story; we're begging you)
FoxNews: Liberals Do Nothing To Prevent Daily Animal Cruelty
Breitbart: Elites Behind Falling Animal Spree, Blood on Their Hands
Weather Channel: 120 Million Americans Affected by 20% Chance of Precipitation
The Same Project Veritas?
CNN: It's Raining Cats and Dogs
MSNBC: Reign Continues, still No Tax Returns
Local News: Some Rain Today (please click in our affiliate links which have nothing to do with any possible news story; we're begging you)
FoxNews: Liberals Do Nothing To Prevent Daily Animal Cruelty
Breitbart: Elites Behind Falling Animal Spree, Blood on Their Hands
Weather Channel: 120 Million Americans Affected by 20% Chance of Precipitation
The Same Project Veritas?
Last edited:
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
But if you really believe this, why bother going to those threads? Would it not be more effective to ignore those threads? I'm not a mind reader so I don't know what not trying to start a discussion. I have not seen the video's and I'm not sure if I will.. But I don't really mind them being there and he may have shared them for anybody who is interrested in the subject? I see many things on the Internet that I don't care about and I do go to all of them to let them know that I don't care. It's silly.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,364
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I mean @GTP Red Pill already declared his allegiance to being a hateful, misogynistic, racist, neckbeard by changing his name to include "red pill". It's no secret that that's what that whole "movement" is about and those who follow it openly embrace it. Red Pillers are nothing but a bunch of incels conspiracy-theory-pushing people who are there just to hate on anything that doesn't subscribe to the ultra-right-wing, white, male...uhhh fantasy? Honestly, I don't think any of those beliefs belong on GTP, but I'm also not a mod and I'm don't know what has or hasn't been done. Seriously, white knighting for a member that embraces some serious awful ideas seems strange. It's fine to have a different opinion, many of us here are all over the political spectrum and we manage to have a discussion that doesn't involve touting a group that's downright hateful.
Also, posting a thread going after CNN is pretty useless considering we already have a thread for the topic of the media being bias. I don't even disagree that CNN pushes fear and biases, it's what sells and the news is in the business of making money and selling a product so I fully understand why they do it. I just don't think it deserves its own thread because a topic on the subject already exists.
As for why go into these threads? I mean it's an open discussion board and if you post something chances are you're looking for a discussion. We openly talk about things on here that can and do have starkly different views. However, since the OP decidedly put everyone that doesn't subscribe to their way of thinking on the ignore list, I suspect it's a pretty one-sided discussion and really just comes across as spamming drivel.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,980
- Mile High City
Are you saying you want a safe space?
McLaren
Premium
- 45,404
- Texas
Psh. Dude changed his GTP name so he can further commit to posting low-effort, blatantly politically-biased content and then not bother even attempting to discuss what he posts. It's practically borderline trolling at this point; hell, I thought it was another troll account until I saw the signature. In which case, he gets the same low-effort, off the cuff replies back.
It's cute though to hear about civil discussion involving someone who also says they'll quickly put you on their Ignore list for whatever they deem is a fallacy or misrepresentation which encompasses nearly all their posts here to begin with....
It's cute though to hear about civil discussion involving someone who also says they'll quickly put you on their Ignore list for whatever they deem is a fallacy or misrepresentation which encompasses nearly all their posts here to begin with....
Last edited:
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
I go to threads because I suspect there may be something interesting to read and there's (often) much to be gained from an insightful discussion. As already mentioned, that's NOT what this was.
Over the last 20 years, we've seen insightful discussions online slowly dry up due to trolls and bots who have a clear agenda. They don't want discussions. And these cult like tactics of telling people what to think and how to think are leading us down a dangerous path. Having discussions online takes work. And often research. And time. And if one can't be bothered bringing their best to a discussion, where others are investing their time and effort, it's a waste.
- 3,885
- St.Pete, FL
- NotThePrez
- NotThePrez
First off, it's a public discussion board, and as such anything posted here is fair game for the responses. As long as said responses don't break the AUP (which, if they did, the mods would certainly do something about it), all's good. If you feel that a certain post(s) does break these rules, than you should probably report it.
Secondly, there's already a thread dedicated to discussing bias in the media. It's a relatively active thread, so @GTP Red Pill could've posted in there if he was actually interested in a discussion. Given the title of this thread, the content in the OP as well as the fact that it was created in spite of the existence of an already established thread, it gives the very strong impression that the OP is not interested in an actual discussion and rather wants to have his own space to bash CNN.
Last I checked, there are rules against posting a stand-alone thread for topics that already have established threads.
Personally speaking, I'm not going to put someone on the ignore list just because they're "annoying" or, if I had to guess what you really mean, disagree with my views. Doing so limits discussion overall and stops me from having a chance to potentially learn from and see the viewpoint of the opposite side, even if the opposite side is one that actively supports measures that go against my own interests (see the BLM thread for examples).
@GTP Red Pill has proven, both by his own actions and his signature, to be a person who would rather create his own safe space and shield himself from opposing viewpoints than engage in genuine discussion (or even consider the possibility that his viewpoints might be wrong). Also, there is some rather scathing irony in his new username, but that's neither here-nor-there.
Now, if it's a problem of a user(s) posting things that are just straight-up toxic, dishonest and being trolly (Motorsport sub-forum during the pre-season comes to mind), I'll report them, and I encourage others to do the same.
As @UKMikey has already said, discussion is a two way street, and this user has a noticeable history of not engaging in faithful discussion, and tends to resort to childish responses when asked to explain/support his stance. And again, it's pretty clear that this user has no interest in an actual discussion, and would rather his own biases go unchecked, and mute individuals who may disagree with him.
Because this is a discussion board that has hosted people from all walks of life and all over the political spectrum, not a safe space for hatefulness and poorly though-out conspiracies.
@Joey D has also already touched on this, but the user that you're going out of your way to defend has adopted the mantel of a highly mysognistic, hateful, deeply out-of-touch and downright nasty section of the male population. He has also made attempts to defend and promote both a well-known bigot and, judging by his current avatar, has decided to (in some capacity) embrace a character that was famously written as a murdering, terrorist Nazi rapist. While VBR is more than welcome to hold these views on a personal level, that doesn't mean that those around him should just accept it and not call such hateful views out. Quite frankly, such bull:censored: doesn't belong on GTP, imo. Reddit and Twitter are much better places for such malarkey.
- Status
Similar threads
