Spot Journalistic Bias and Manipulation (was Media Bias)

[TexRex]

I haven't cut and run from anything.

Sure you have. You do it a lot, point of fact, but I quoted you as having done so just then.

Don't say "whatever..." if you don't want people to observe you dismissing discussion because you can't refute arguments rationally.

I'm not going to argue with you over something that wasn't the subject at hand

The subject at hand was the image you posted. That's why you posted it. I remarked on it. You quoted me as having done so and made a desperate attempt to refute what I said. Unable to actually refute what I said, you cut and run...though not before attempting to shutdown discussion because you couldn't actually refute arguments therein.

I'm not gonna answer your question either cause you already know my answer is the correct one.

Amazing.

I didn't ask a question.

You insist that I know that the answer you won't give to the question I didn't ask is the correct one.

Jeebus, you're just broken.

Aaaaand you cut and run.

Also you are a lier saying Biden doesn't sniff people. Do some googling. Plenty of videos of women and children cringing when he gets near them.

There is photographic and video evidence of Biden with his face in close proximity to individuals. I don't deny this. I've even quipped about it. But there is no evidence of him sniffling or sniffing. If there was, you'd provide it as is your onus instead of telling me to go look for it.

Now unless you have something to say on topic, we are done here. Goodnight.

TDS man...

Bonsoir, Trumpkin.

 

[ryzno]

Don't say "whatever..." if you don't want people to observe you dismissing discussion because you can't refute arguments rationally.

People say whatever for a number of reasons.
Saying whatever can mean, I'm done with this stupid argument. It's a waste of time.

Now tell me he's whispering in that little girls ears with his hands over her ears. I'm begging you. Now can it can neverver be proven he actually sniffed anyone. Makes for a good joke though.

And you didn't exactly pose it as a question but you pretty much said Trump supporters think it's ok for anyone to randomly touch anyone without asking a single Trump supporter here before voicing your opinion. Is BS. This isn't kiss the baby politics times anymore. Times change.

TDS man.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

This is stupid. @TexRex when you first saw the LA Times headline in the screenshot of the tweets @ryzno posted, did you know what altercation the LA Times was referring to? Did you know about the egg throwing woman in the ape mask?

 

[Joey D]

Isn't Larry Elder the guy that denies climate change, spouts misogynistic views, and pushes a whole bunch of misinformation on his show about various topics, including COVID-19? Wait, I got this one, yes he's exactly that guy. So conservative pundit turned politician who pushed misinformation is a victim of misinformation. Please, let me break out my tiny violin.

 

[ryzno]

So conservative pundit turned politician who pushed misinformation is a victim of misinformation.

Sounds more like a victim of racism to me.

 

[Joey D]

Sounds more like a victim of racism to me.

The confrontation, sure, there was probably something racial about it since they opted for a gorilla mask to target a black guy. I mean maybe it was all they had laying around, but the optics on it screams racism to me.

However, the Tweet you posted with a picture of Elder "slapping" a female supporter (?) and the headline they used feels like someone being the victim of misinformation. Yes, the picture is legit and the headline is legit, they just don't go together. It feels exactly like something a politician and/or political pundit would do to generate a "buzz" regardless of their party affliation.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

It feels exactly like something a politician and/or political pundit would do to generate a "buzz" regardless of their party affliation.

But a pundit or a politician didn't pair that picture with that headline, the LA Times did.

 

[TexRex]

Well, so much for "goodnight."

People say whatever for a number of reasons.
Saying whatever can mean, I'm done with this stupid argument. It's a waste of time.

Cutting. And. Running.

Now tell me he's whispering in that little girls ears with his hands over her ears. I'm begging you. Now can it can neverver be proven he actually sniffed anyone. Makes for a good joke though.
View attachment 1079935

Strawman arguments--even preemptive ones--are deceitful.

He's got his face in close proximity to an individual. That's all you can reasonably discern from the image. There is zero evidence that he's sniffing and/or sniffling. You appear to even acknowledge as much in that jumble of words and non-words. You're grasping at straws.

And you didn't exactly pose it as a question but you pretty much said Trump supporters think it's ok for anyone to randomly touch anyone without asking a single Trump supporter here before voicing your opinion. Is BS.

This is either a strawman or a scathing indictment of your cognitive faculties.

I said Elder was touching the woman "Bidenly" (a term that I coined in that moment to describe a touch that could be either affectionate or creepy depending on how one feels about Biden, which is very much subject to political bent) and you shifted the goalposts to "sniffling." Though there is no evidence Biden does any sniffling and/or sniffing with his face in close proximity to another, there is no functional difference between that and a creepy touch (as is your wont). You then accused me of talking about something other than the topic--which was the image you posted, which is what I was remarking on--seemingly because you couldn't logically refute what I said. You later insisted that Biden sniffs people (curious given that this was a continuation of supposed off-topic discussion) and told me to Google videos for proof when the onus is yours to present any supposed proof. Now you seem to be acknowledging, per that jumble of words and non-words, that there is no actual evidence of Biden sniffing and/or sniffling, but it makes for a good joke.

You're all over the place.

This isn't kiss the baby politics times anymore.

Says who? I mean literally right now it's probably inadvisable...(pandemic)...but maybe such a sweeping declaration can't be made and this is subject to specific circumstances.

Times change.

Since 2016?

As an aside...is that affectionate or creepy? Maybe one can't make such a determination rationally without context not provided in the single image.

@TexRex when you first saw the LA Times headline in the screenshot of the tweets @ryzno posted, did you know what altercation the LA Times was referring to?

I heard a snippet on the news that law enforcement was investigating an attack on Elder at a campaign stop in southern California. That was the extent of my knowledge prior and I'm only assuming it's this incident.

Did you know about the egg throwing woman in the ape mask?

Mask? Yes, it was in the screenshot. Egg? No clue until you said so.

Isn't Larry Elder the guy that denies climate change, spouts misogynistic views, and pushes a whole bunch of misinformation on his show about various topics, including COVID-19? Wait, I got this one, yes he's exactly that guy. So conservative pundit turned politician who pushed misinformation is a victim of misinformation. Please, let me break out my tiny violin.

I gather he's also been alleging impropriety in the electoral process because that's the thing to do now. It doesn't matter whether the allegations are legitimately substantiated because the base will be motivated regardless.

Of course none of this justifies any physical attack.

I'm not getting racism. I mean, yeah, there are racial connotations with primates and black people, disgusting as it is, but it's certainly not concrete here. It's a mask. The pink hair doesn't seem in keeping with the bigoted trope.

It is curious, though, that the right is so quick to dismiss allegations of racism in questionable use of force cases but they're quick to play that card when they or someone with whom they're aligned has been targeted.

 

[ryzno]

Since 2016?

Little girl looks uncomfortable to me...
Stop thinking I agreed with everything Trump did/does. As long as you do, I think our exchanges are going to be a waste of time.
I've moved on and am worried about the current administration and 2022.

Yes, the picture is legit and the headline is legit, they just don't go together.

I never questioned the picture or the headline. I posted it cause it's a biased media post.
Without reading it, no one would know, seems y'all didn't.
Is that post not media bias?
If it's not, now I know why I never posted in this thread till today. Can't post anywhere in peace even when I'm correct.

 

[TexRex]

Stop thinking I agreed with everything Trump did/does.

Stop strawmanning. If you go back through our interactions, I think you'll find a common theme to be that I'm addressing the things you say when you say them, with the occasional reference to what you've said in the past as it relates to what I'm addressing.

I honestly don't care what you think or what you know, which isn't meant to offend, and instead I'm concerned with (and sometimes by) the things that you say.

As long as you do, I think our exchanges are going to be a waste of time.

They're certainly likely to be when you gloss over so much. I literally said "as an aside."

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I heard a snippet on the news that law enforcement was investigating an attack on Elder at a campaign stop in southern California. That was the extent of my knowledge prior and I'm only assuming it's this incident.
Mask? Yes, it was in the screenshot. Egg? No clue until you said so.

So the LA Times deceived you in that tweet.

The story is, a white woman in an ape mask, threw an egg at a black gubernatorial candidate. There are pictures and video that show that part of the story The story.

I'll bet if the woman in the ape mask were wearing a MAGA hat on top of that pink hair, and the gubernatorial candidate were a Democrat, they would have picked a different picture.

In fact that would be the big story of the day across all of the bias news media.

 

[TexRex]

I'll bet if the woman in the ape mask were wearing a MAGA hat on top of that pink hair, and the gubernatorial candidate were a Democrat, they would have picked a different picture.

She likely wasn't, it wasn't and they couldn't because the other two things didn't happen.

We can draw this pathetic hypothetical out further and acknowledge that you would have either declined to comment on the incident due to it not fitting your preferred narrative or you would have desperately presented another incident entirely to both sides it.

This is masturbation.

 

[ryzno]

Yes, the picture is legit and the headline is legit, they just don't go together.

I never questioned the picture or the headline. I posted it cause it's a biased media post.
Without reading it, no one would know, seems y'all didn't.
Is that post not media bias?
If it's not, now I know why I never posted in this thread till today. Can't post anywhere in peace even when I'm correct.

This is masturbation

Okay... Too each their own...

 

[Danoff]

View attachment 1079907

He's obviously just touching her Bidenly.

As in sniffling her? Nope.

Is that post not media bias?

I've quoted the context so that you can see how it started.

 

[TexRex]

I've quoted the context so that you can see how it started.

I think it's absolutely possible the LA Times intended to deceive, but you have to squint for that contact to look like a slap.

 

[Danoff]

I think it's absolutely possible the LA Times intended to deceive, but you have to squint for that contact to look like a slap.

This was my point, that whether or not the news article was biased was largely beside the point after the first 2 posts.

 

[TexRex]

This was my point, that whether or not the news article was biased was largely beside the point after the first 2 posts.

I apologize, I may be super slow on the uptake this morning but I think I'm still missing something. Was it "wrong" to address the nature of the contact rather than supposed bias in the article's presentation? Or are you commenting on something else entirely? Again, my apologies.

 

[ryzno]

This was my point, that whether or not the news article was biased was largely beside the point after the first 2 posts.

If he could've kept it on topic...

 

[Danoff]

I apologize, I may be super slow on the uptake this morning but I think I'm still missing something. Was it "wrong" to address the nature of the contact rather than supposed bias in the article's presentation? Or are you commenting on something else entirely? Again, my apologies.

No problem. I'll spell it out.

@ryzno is claiming that he is the victim of the message board picking on him. He's saying that his original post here was solid (that it demonstrated media bias), and that therefore the ensuing argument is due to people attacking him. In order to make it clear what happened, I went back to the first few posts to remind him that the disagreement started not because of the presence or lack of bias, but because of a disagreement over whether Biden was sniffing people's heads. That's about as far removed from the original post here as you can get in two extremely short responses. 11 words across 2 posts and the point went from a news article (not about the president) being biased, to whether or not Joe Biden sniffed someone's hair.

If he could've kept it on topic...

I quoted the original context for you. TexRex talked about an aspect of your post (on topic). You went from there to something that uniquely had to do with Tex's post (off topic). Not that I'm complaining, I do this all the time. I'm doing it now in fact. It's just important to remember that you did it.

 

[ryzno]

No problem. I'll spell it out.

@ryzno is claiming that he is the victim of the message board picking on him. He's saying that his original post here was solid (that it demonstrated media bias), and that therefore the ensuing argument is due to people attacking him. In order to make it clear what happened, I went back to the first few posts to remind him that the disagreement started not because of the presence or lack of bias, but because of a disagreement over whether Biden was sniffing people's heads. That's about as far removed from the original post here as you can get in two extremely short responses. 11 words across 2 posts and the point went from a news article (not about the president) being biased, to whether or not Joe Biden sniffed someone's hair.


I quoted the original context for you. TexRex talked about an aspect of your post (on topic). You went from there to something that uniquely had to do with Tex's post (off topic). Not that I'm complaining, I do this all the time. I'm doing it now in fact. It's just important to remember that you did it.

Responding to an idiotic post with an idiotic response. Is what I did.
That's why I hate answering any of y'all.
The Bias was right there in his face and he had to go all TDS. Then finally admit he didn't know much about it. And that he does get his jollies off pissing me off.
Screw y'all.

 

[TexRex]

4If he could've kept it on topic...

To my mind, the image you posted was the topic. Within the image itself was an allegation of bias centering on the nature of the contact. The contact was presented as a slap, either by the LA Times or the individual alleging bias, or both, except it's so clearly not a slap. The body language, certainly on Elder's part, speaks to affection rather than aggression. I don't know if the affection is reciprocal, but she doesn't appear to be cringing or pulling away.

Are you capable of addressing this? I promise I will consider your response if you put some actual thought into it and it's clear you've considered my remarks in your response.

I don't have a problem with people who don't agree with me. Those kinds of discussions really aren't satisfying at all. What I don't like is people who don't agree with me being dismissive or [worse] deceptive in discussion.

 

[TexRex]

Responding to an idiotic post with an idiotic response. Is what I did.
That's why I hate answering any of y'all.
The Bias was right there in his face and he had to go all TDS. Then finally admit he didn't know much about it. And that he does get his jollies off pissing me off.
Screw y'all.

 

[Danoff]

The Bias was right there in his face

On topic, I do actually agree with @TexRex here, the photo doesn't really look like a slap. It's a weird photo, for sure, probably picked because it's weird so that people would click on it. It looks... clickbaity to me. "What's going on in that photo, I have to read this article!". If they could have just circled something random in red in the background, or put a red arrow on something innocuous, then it would have ticked all of the clickbait boxes.

If it were a slap, I'd expect to see different reactions all around, not a bunch of slightly smiling faces. It doesn't look like movement, or impact, in the photo. When I first read the caption - that the girl thought the photo looked like a slap - I disagreed with her take. I think Tex's point that the photo is a bit of a Rorschach test is fair as well. It's one of those where you can see or not see what you want. As was mentioned, Trump has a bunch of these photos (including some with his daughter).

...and now I've officially taken the same off-ramp you guys did.

All of that seems like fine discussion, but I wanted to remind you that much of that discussion was in direct response to your own comment - about how clear Biden's hair-sniffing photos were. You invited the argument, and then decided you were the victim of it. Again, it's fine to invite that argument, I do it all the time on this board. But own it, you stepped through that door on purpose.

 

[ryzno]

You invited the argument

No I didn't. Not once did I look at that and see Bideny or even think about inappropriate touching. Someone wanting to take it off topic did. And by your definition won.
That's the thanks I get for posting an example of media bias.
Again you wonder why I hate posting here. Y'all always gotta find some way to twist my posts and turn it around to make me look like the idiot.
You wonder why I cuss at y'all and hate y'all.
I can't post a god damn thing that's true without this ********. I even told him he was wrong. "Nope". He then goes on a TDS rant. But he won. No wonder people think this section is a biased liberal cest pool.

 

[Danoff]

No I didn't.

That's it in a nutshell isn't it?

This is exactly what I'm getting at. This is a common theme for you, where you ask people not to respond to your posts here. You've done it to me at least 3 times, and I've seen you do it to many other members. You seem to think that this discussion board is a place where discussion doesn't happen. I don't think you're a religious person, but it does sound bit like a church to me - where some old dude stands in front of a group and spouts nonsense for an hour and everyone just has to sit and listen in silence, not a single argument. At best you could maybe ask for clarification (more spouting) after the sermon is over.

That's not what we do here. If you want that, start a blog and disable comments. What we do here is discuss... a lot of times we argue. When someone says something, it occasionally gets ripped to shreds - happens to all of us. It's why I come here - to see if my statements get ripped to shreds. I think it's why a lot of people come here, to really put their minds to some exterior scrutiny, to hold their thoughts accountable.

You absolutely did invite that argument (and I invited this one). And I'll say something which has been said to you specifically many times in the past - if you don't want it, don't post.

 

[Famine]

Again you wonder why I hate posting here.

I don't wonder that at all; I know why you hate posting here.

What I do wonder is why you do it given that you hate it so much.

 

[ryzno]

That's it in a nutshell isn't it?

This is exactly what I'm getting at. This is a common theme for you, where you ask people not to respond to your posts here. You've done it to me at least 3 times, and I've seen you do it to many other members.

I wonder why...

If you want to talk to me, talk about the post, not me.
I'll post it again since it got lost in BS as usual.

 

[ryzno]

I don't wonder that at all; I know why you hate posting here.

What I do wonder is why you do it given that you hate it so much.

In hopes someone would for once play the damn ball. Bringing Biden into the thread so he had an excuse to go all TDS was unnecessary.
But I already know you're gonna defend him cause I'm never right even when I am.
My post couldn't have been anymore on topic if I tried and here we are.
Even something as simple as me telling y'all I'm getting the shot turns into this crap.
I can't post a damn thing to where it doesn't get twisted to where y'all piss me off and then talk about my posting habits...
I regret even posting in this thread.
Waste 9 years of my life here hoping for one god damn time I post something and y'all would be like, hey, you know what? ryzno is right. But I guess I expect to much from such educated people.
Now, I have nothing else to say in this thread unless it has to do with my original post.

 

[TexRex]

I wonder why...

If you want to talk to me, talk about the post, not me.
I'll post it again since it got lost in BS as usual.

View attachment 1080035

In the post, the woman alleges the LA Times used an image in which she appears to be on the receiving end of a slap by Elder and that this image was used to deceive readers. This allegation is not supported by the image itself, which clearly depicts physical contact that's affectionate and not aggressive. It's all in the body language of both involved parties. Whether this affectionate contact appears to be appropriate or creepy is highly dependent upon one's view of Elder much as it is in similar interactions involving Biden.

Do you care to respond to this rationally and without deflection or deception or would you prefer to cut and run?

Bringing Biden into the thread so he had an excuse to go all TDS was unnecessary.

I'll bite, though this has nothing to do with the post. What does the "T" in "TDS" represent?

 

[Famine]

In hopes someone would for once play the damn ball

Which they do.

Every time your arguments are addressed you pull out the victim card, and then you get abusive.

Then you post fractured gibberish (and then repeatedly go back and make edits to it, despite there being no time sensitivity to your original post) and play the "I'm not as clever as y'all and I only speak redneck" card (which is insane given how frequently you condescend to others). And get abusive.

Then you play the harassment card, despite the fact you've twice this month alone randomly tagged the user you say is harassing you in completely uninvolved topics - which looks quite a lot more like harassment than making a joke about someone caressing someone's face in direct, fully contextual response to a post you've made with a picture of someone caressing someone's face. And get abusive.

Then you play the "whatever" and "I'm done" cards, except you're not done because you keep on going. And get abusive.


You clearly just want to say stuff and not get challenged on it. That isn't what you get here and that's why you hate it. But you keep on doing it, despite all your proclamations about how much you hate "y'all", and how much you hate GTP, and how much you hate posting.

It's like you have Stockholm Syndrome, or an overwhelming desire to be humiliated repeatedly in public. I know everyone's entitled to their own kinks, but... man.