Spot Journalistic Bias and Manipulation (was Media Bias)

[TenEightyOne]

You missed my point. That so called loophole was closed (allegedly) when Obama made the wide sweeping executive orders for gun control earlier this year that required every gun purchase (regardless if you bought your gun from a private seller) to have a background check.

So it's not working as has been amply demonstrated. That should be in the gun thread if you have a political point to make.

You missed my point. That so called loophole was closed (allegedly) when Obama made the wide sweeping executive orders for gun control earlier this year that required every gun purchase (regardless if you bought your gun from a private seller) to have a background check.

The fact that this producer managed to do such an act is indeed illegal on multiple fronts, not just the two that I just pointed out. Also the fact that it was presented in such a way that there is more of a widespread problem of this lawbreaking happening than it actually occurring is an issue by itself because of the reason that there are no numbers that compares legal private sales to legal sales from an FFL.

Agreed, the sale was illegal. It shouldn't have been able to happen.

That's the point of the film.

Does such a film really qualify for this thread though? It's hardly a normal piece of news media, it's a documentary film that makes its point and purpose very clear. It's also tipped to do very well at Sundance, I'm told.

Spot the Media Bias

 

[Sanji Himura]

Does such a film really qualify for this thread though? It's hardly a normal piece of news media, it's a documentary film that makes its point and purpose very clear. It's also tipped to do very well at Sundance, I'm told.

It was done by Katie Couric, a journalist. I think that it qualifies. Had it been anyone else, then yes, it would have gone to the Gun thread.

 

[Danoff]

Smoking "costs" the "world economy" over 1 trillion per year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lth-organization-says/?utm_term=.b9feb7389fb9

"The tobacco industry produces and markets products that kill millions of people prematurely, rob households of finances that could have been used for food and education, and impose immense health care costs on families, communities and countries.”

You could say the same thing about skiing, or fast food, or small aircraft. It doesn't "cost" the world economy anything. People of the world choose to spend over 1 trillion per year on smoking. That's the headline.

 

[JKgo]

Smoking "costs" the "world economy" over 1 trillion per year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lth-organization-says/?utm_term=.b9feb7389fb9

"The tobacco industry produces and markets products that kill millions of people prematurely, rob households of finances that could have been used for food and education, and impose immense health care costs on families, communities and countries.”

You could say the same thing about skiing, or fast food, or small aircraft. It doesn't "cost" the world economy anything. People of the world choose to spend over 1 trillion per year on smoking. That's the headline.

...

But, but!!

Smoking costs the world economy $1 trillion per year, World Health Organizations says....

Not getting a vibe that the piece's an op ed from The Washington Post but them reporting what they heard from WHO instead. So, uh, consequently, not seeing any bias here....

Besides, I unequivocally hate smoking. My old man smokes, and that **** gets in every-effing-where, man. Ashes, the dingy smell, half-finished butts - dear lord.

 

[Rage Racer]

>Racism in Russia
>Dynamo Kiev

wat

 

[Famine]

>Racism in Russia
>Dynamo Kiev

wat

Oh so suddenly Russia doesn't want Ukraine?

 

[Liquid]

It's more outstanding that Ukrainian or Russian football hooligans producing a racially aggravated display is considered a "shock".

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I think this next example is more than just media bias, it is literally fake news.

From this interview on Fox, you only need to watch about 3 minutes or so to get the gist of what he was talking about.



But The Independent decided to turn that into this, complete with a carefully edited video to back up their fake news story.

Donald Trump slams 'archaic' US constitution that is 'really bad' for the country

Trump was talking about Senate procedures, which I guess are based on Robert's Rules of Order. He was not talking about the Constitution.

 

[TenEightyOne]

But The Independent decided to turn that into this, complete with a carefully edited video to back up their fake news story.

Donald Trump slams 'archaic' US constitution that is 'really bad' for the country

Trump was talking about Senate procedures, which I guess are based on Robert's Rules of Order. He was not talking about the Constitution.

You're kidding, right? You don't see a difference between a lower case and a capital C? He's complaining about the system in the Senate and Congress, not The Constitution. Watch the video, read the article... they match up.

EDIT: While you're watching the video you might ask yourself whether such framed questions which in themselves spin the actions of the interview constitute bias in themselves

 

[Chrunch Houston]

You're kidding, right? You don't see a difference between a lower case and a capital C? He's complaining about the system in the Senate and Congress, not The Constitution. Watch the video, read the article... they match up.

EDIT: While you're watching the video you might ask yourself whether such framed questions which in themselves spin the actions of the interview constitute bias in themselves

I just clicked on the link I posted, for some reason it was not working, I just fixed it. Read the article by The Independent. That is what I was talking about.

They accuse Trump of calling the Constitution archaic, which he clearly did not.

Small c or large c, they are saying constitution. You give them a pass on that?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Small c or large c, they are saying constitution. You give them a pass on that?

Yes, the meanings are different. The constitution is the set of rules, checks, balances, protocols and other precedence that the country is governed by. In the case of the US (and others) The Constitution is a titled, specific document which can be separate from the constitution. As an example the UK has a constitution (small c) consisting of thousands of separate documents, histories, precedents et al but no Capital C Constitution.

Link worked fine for me, maybe because I had the story in my history... so yes, I saw what you were talking about.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Yes, the meanings are different. The constitution is the set of rules, checks, balances, protocols and other precedence that the country is governed by. In the case of the US (and others) The Constitution is a titled, specific document which can be separate from the constitution. As an example the UK has a constitution (small c) consisting of thousands of separate documents, histories, precedents et al but no Capital C Constitution.

Link worked fine for me, maybe because I had the story in my history... so yes, I saw what you were talking about.

The fact remains that Trump in no way said the the Constitution of the US was archaic. The Independent lied and said he did in their headline. The rules of the senate are called just that, the rules of the senate, they can change them at will, they are not written into the US Constitution.

The Headline of the article starts with "Donald Trump slams 'archaic' US constitution" cut and paste also carries formating.

The US has no constitution, we have a Constitution, If that is your defence of The Independent. point taken. I am sure many around here will keep that in mind. I know I will.

More from the artical

The Independent
In an interview with Fox News to mark the milestone, the Republican called the system of checks and balances on power “archaic”.

“It’s a very rough system,” he said. “It’s an archaic system … It’s really a bad thing for the country.”

emphasis added

Again they lie. He was not talking about the system of checks and balances.

But keep on defending them @TenEightyOne.

 

[TenEightyOne]

But keep on defending them @TenEightyOne.

I guess we agree to disagree - when I first read the article the distinction seemed clear to me. If you genuinely read it as meaning the Constitution then I guess others could too, point taken.

 

[BobK]

Until I read the above comments I was unaware of the fact that we not only have the Constitution, we also have "a constitution". Live and learn.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Until I read the above comments I was unaware of the fact that we not only have the Constitution, we also have "a constitution". Live and learn.

As I replied to @Chrunch Houston I was considering that maybe it's a British English thing as all manner of bodies can have be considered as having a little-c constitution. In America it seems natural that people think of the definition as referring solely to The Constitution. For that reason I could see why the British article linked may seem to an American to be implying something different e.g. Trump blames The Constitution rather than the government's constitution.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Until I read the above comments I was unaware of the fact that we not only have the Constitution, we also have "a constitution". Live and learn.

I'm sure that, if it's necessary, some will find new and creative ways to spell it to make their case. Le constitution' anyone? Konstitushun ftw?

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm sure that, if it's necessary, some will find new and creative ways to spell it to make their case. Le constitution' anyone? Konstitushun ftw?

So you think the Independent created a new spelling of a word to make their case? I'm not sure what you mean?

Le constitution is also the correct spelling, you'll see that Wiki notes it's "a fundamental law or ensemble of princples that sets the organisation and function of a general body, generally a state or ensemble of states/Une constitution est une loi fondamentale ou un ensemble de principes1 qui fixe l'organisation et le fonctionnement d'un organisme, généralement d'un État ou d'un ensemble d'États".

Are we going down the Only One Constitution line or something?

 

[UKMikey]

#notallconstitutions

 

[Danoff]

I guess we agree to disagree - when I first read the article the distinction seemed clear to me. If you genuinely read it as meaning the Constitution then I guess others could too, point taken.

I think that's the real point, it's click-bait slight of hand.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Paradise lost: idyllic French villages turn to far right

Why is Le Penn always labeled as 'far right'? I watched the debate today. Marcon kept talking about transforming France, she seemed to want to keep France, France. While it is clear that she is a conservative, I wouldn't call her far right.

 

[UKMikey]

Why is Le Penn always labeled as 'far right'? I watched the debate today. Marcon kept talking about transforming France, she seemed to want to keep France, France. While it is clear that she is a conservative, I wouldn't call her far right.

Whether it's media bias or not, this is the BBC's justification.

The FN has strong ties with the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV), Austria's Freedom Party (FPOe), Belgium's Flemish Interest (VB), Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the Italian Northern League (LN).

They are all part of the FN-led Europe of Nations and Freedom grouping in the European Parliament and are either right-wing populist or, in the case of the FPOe, far right.

Geert Wilders, of leader of the Dutch PVV, wants to ban the Koran. The Italian Northern League's leader Matteo Salvini is known for his praise of fascist leader Benito Mussolini.

These views are toxic to the political right in Europe, and many centre-right parties have said they will not form coalitions with them.

Presumably if she's not far right she should make it easier to form alliances with the centre-right. However most of these guys are populists rather than actual far-rightists according to the article.

 

[Dennisch]

Paradise lost: idyllic French villages turn to far right

Why is Le Penn always labeled as 'far right'? I watched the debate today. Marcon kept talking about transforming France, she seemed to want to keep France, France. While it is clear that she is a conservative, I wouldn't call her far right.

That's a label you get for saying stuff like: Own people / country first here in Europe.

 

[Imari]

Are we going down the Only One Constitution line or something?

One Constitution to rule them all,
and in the darkness bind them.

 

[TheCracker]

Why is Le Penn always labeled as 'far right'? I watched the debate today. Marcon kept talking about transforming France, she seemed to want to keep France, France. While it is clear that she is a conservative, I wouldn't call her far right.

Because although Marine has attempted to round off the Front National's sharper fascistic edges, booting out her father and other hardliners, in an effort to make it a more populist party, it's policies are still pretty much in line with what's classed as far-right ideology.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Because although Marine has attempted to round off the Front National's sharper fascistic edges, booting out her father and other hardliners, in an effort to make it a more populist party, it's policies are still pretty much in line with what's classed as far-right ideology.

What aspects of facism and racism do the FN support? Those are hallmarks of far right ideology no?

 

[TheCracker]

What aspects of facism and racism do the FN support? Those are hallmarks of far right ideology no?

They're not the defining characteristics of far-right ideology. Far-right policies include the likes of nationalism and an opposition to immigration. Racism and fascism tend to be classed as extreme-right ideology.

 

[Johnnypenso]

They're not the defining characteristics of far-right ideology. Far-right policies include the likes of nationalism and an opposition to immigration. Racism and fascism tend to be classed as extreme-right ideology.

There are so many negative labels to apply to people we disagree with I can't keep up.

 

[UKMikey]

What aspects of facism and racism do the FN support? Those are hallmarks of far right ideology no?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/marine-le-...ti-semitic-comment-far-right-fn-party-1491647

Fascism:

Pigeot file a lawsuit for defamation on 12 March after Le Republicain Lorrain revealed former members of the FN accused the national federations Secretary of worshipping Nazi Germany. The report, which was backed by Charlie Hebdo, revealed several former FN militants had indeed written to the party leadership to denounce her love of the Third Reich.

One of them, former departmental secretary of the FN for Moselle, Bernard Brion, who has just left Marine Le Pen's party, swears he saw with his own eyes the attraction moved somewhat to the Third Reich. He said: "Yes, I saw crockery with the SS logo at her house, and a frame with a picture of Hitler."

Racism:

"We have candidates obsessed with the Jewish conspiracy, who believe black people are 2000 years behind, who compare Christiane Taubira (a black minister) to a monkey," he told IBTimes UK. "And the fact this is all on public profile pages of those candidates, for instance, is bewildening.

"It's easy to say what has shocked us: some candidates say 'death to the Jews', some say 'death to the Arabs', some rejoice at the death of Roma gypsies – it's not really subtle."

 

[Johnnypenso]

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/marine-le-...ti-semitic-comment-far-right-fn-party-1491647

Fascism:


Racism:

I don't whitelist any sites so I can't use that link. So I take it they are extreme right wing now?

 

[UKMikey]

I don't whitelist any sites so I can't use that link. So I take it they are extreme right wing now?

Don't ask me, I'm just passing links on. I'll leave it to other people to draw their own conclusions. Hopefully the quotes made it past whatever blocks you have up.