File: What is Fake News.swf-(9.47 MB, 480x272, Other)
[_] Anon 3455950 Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anon 3455954 >># >its not a Prager U edit go back to fucking /pol/ or post something worth anyone's time you bootlicking cuck
>> [_] Anon 3455958 >># here comes the "go back to pol" idiots
>> [_] Anon 3455968 >># Cope
>> [_] Anon 3455973 >># go back to pol
>> [_] vipper 3455974 >># go back to pol cuck
>> [_] Anon 3455977 >># go back to pol idiot
>> [_] Anon 3455982 >># >># >># >># bakas
>> [_] Anon 3455984 Prager Hoax Class is now in session for the terrorist who was killed by capital police at the attempted coup that occurred in America yesterday. First, the terrorist was killed while trying to break through a barricaded door that lead to the Speaker's Chambers, who is the highest ranking official in the capital building. https://twitter.com/VippusaO/status/1347 109638454583298 First, smoking gun evidence the terrorists were actively trying to break into the Speaker's Chamber as they were breaking down the windows and the girl try and jump through the frame before getting smoked. https://twitter.com/FistusGoodus/status/ 1347010505588793349 A clear image of her at :10, you can see her trying to jump through the broken window frame and breach the last line of defense when she got smoked. Also you can notice the sign above that says Speaker's Chamber https://twitter.com/thejaydenxander/stat us/1347056697899163648 And here's video of the officer, who's right by the barricade and seeing the terrorists trying to tear it down and break through. He waited until a breach of imminent before firing and the angle he was at ensured that there was no collateral damage. It also shows how the doors were barricaded to keep them out. Remember kids, when you see a barricaded door and a man on the other side with a gun saying stand back, don't be full retard like these terrorists and try and break down the barricade and go towards the gun.
>> [_] Anon 3455991 Hahahaha left sucks amidoinitright guyyssszzz!!!1!11!
>> [_] Anon 3455992 >># /pol/ack too here, posting political things here is really lame anon, try posting touhous instead :)
>> [_] Anon 3455993 >># Ashli really risked her life doing that, but calling that terrorism is too far off, by that metric the founding fathers are terrorists and so is the legitimacy of the state. May she rest in peace.
>> [_] Anon 3455997 >># She was part of a coup to stop the peaceful transition of power and overthrow the government. She was a terrorist. Also her own death should please her since she was happy to hear death by firing squad was being brought back because that's what they use on traitors. Press S to spit on grave.
>> [_] Anon 3456001 baby don't hurt me
>> [_] Anon 3456004 ah yes, it's better to burn and destroy businesses and do collateral damages. BLM? Antifa? Nu-uh! Definitely not terrorists
>> [_] Anon 3456006 >># all humans are bias, objectivity isnt a human trait. the closet thing we might be able to get is an all autistic news channel. I'd watch.
>> [_] Anon 3456009 >># >Mum whataboutism Call me when they stage a coup to overthrow the government like we saw yesterday.
>> [_] Anon 3456012 >># /pol/ here. PragerU is zionist propaganda, we don't want them.
>> [_] Anon 3456013 >># >She was part of a coup to stop the peaceful transition of power and overthrow the government. She was a terrorist. And that's a good thing. Or are you a fan of the imperialist, capitalist US government? Sure, make fun of her for being a miga cultist and trusting in Trump, but don't clutch pearls and cry about "TERRORISM" and "TREASON" and "DANGER TO OUR DEMOCRACY!" Biden is just Bush wearing a blue tie.
>> [_] Anon 3456014 >># Hello faggot,yes you're being a big one that takes a big black BLM shaped dildo lodged in your ass 24/7 there, i called you out since you call that as a "coup" with a handful
>> [_] Anon 3456015 White men are terrorists and should be dealt as such
>> [_] Anon 3456020 >># yup, head on back to your containment board commence mass seething of copium ropium will be deployed by the 20th of january
>> [_] Anon 3456022 >># >Being this ass blasted your whataboutism was called out. Call me when they stage a coup to overthrow the government like we saw yesterday. And yest, it was a coup attempt. The only bright spot is that like Trump, his loyalists are exceedingly incompetent.
>> [_] Anon 3456028 >># And since when does revolting against government = terrorism? You know a government can be illegitimate and commit terrorist acts too.
>> [_] Anon 3456029 >># Good thing the peaceful transfer of power within the American government was legitimate, so these were acts of terrorism incited by Trump.
>> [_] Anon 3456030 >># This, (((Dennis Prager))) >># >clutch pearls and cry about "TERRORISM" and "TREASON" and "DANGER TO OUR DEMOCRACY!" Their moral compass now looks like that of the old republican patriot act supporters
>> [_] Anon 3456032 >># peaceful =/= legitimate Were americans revolting against the intolerable acts terrorists too?
>> [_] Anon 3456033 >># >It's not legitimate because I say so I see, you a coup sympathizer then.
>> [_] Anon 3456036 >># Yes you can see i am.
>> [_] Anon 3456038 I watched this all the way through hoping there would be some sort of edit. OP is a gay neggerfaggot
>> [_] Anon 3456041 >># Don't worry Fren, I can still enjoy this without feeling compelled to tell you to go back somewhere.
>> [_] Anon 3456044 >># ass blasted thewhatthebuzzword again? maybe you were too preoccupied with the word "ass" as you were really lodging a BLM dildo up your ass I guess you're too bright about your own definition of coup, where they tried to take over their "zionist leader drumppthhthht" (did I mention right to actually make you understand it?) is still in position but then again, who am I to argue with someone who doesnt consider BLM/Antifa's mostly peaceful looting riots as terrorism, where the "trump supporters" are literally nazis and terrorists with that 'coup', amirite?
>> [_] Anon 3456045 >it was a coup It's ok when BLM protestors cause $2 billion dollars in damages over the span of three fucking months across how many cities, that's protesting, they have the RIGHT to do that. When some unarmed qanon nutters walk into a building and get shot, that's domestic terrorism. you sound completely insane
>> [_] Anon 3456047 >># it's terrorism when you illegally trespass on secured government property and try to take over a federally sanctioned meeting.
>> [_] Anon 3456048 >># so these are terrorists then? https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbrea k-us-news-racial-injustice-d640afdd85404f 0b7ffde44eb75f9512 please readjust the goalposts for your argument, you're calling BLM/antifa terrorists dude
>> [_] Anon 3456050 >># >https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbre ak-us-news-racial-injustice-d640afdd85404 f0b7ffde44eb75f9512 never said they weren't in that case. legally they would indeed be considered terrorists.
>> [_] Anon 3456052 >># cucked prager go back to /pol/ or neck yourselves
>> [_] Anon 3456053 >># >illegally trespass on secured government property Is any and all revolutions terrorism then?
>> [_] Anon 3456054 >># >Call me when they stage a coup to overthrow the government like we saw yesterday. So according to you, targeting the government is worse than targeting civilians?
>> [_] Anon 3456055 >># technically yes. never said some weren't just. like the shit going on in france. keep in mind im neither right or left. merely trying to remain consistent.
>> [_] Anon 3456057 >># Ok then, you are right on the technical aspect anon, i thought you were trying to make some moral judgement with the "terrorist" label, perhaps i need to chill out.
>> [_] Anon 3456058 >># nah. i will admit it is really hard staying consistent with everything going on, though. way too much propaganda and false info floating around
>> [_] Anon 3456060 >># Yeah it's all so tiresome, maybe after the storm goes away we'll have another chance for peace and understanding, who knows.
>> [_] Anon 3456062 dumb bitch got cucked and gave her life for the former host of nbc's the apprentice Dumb bitch got domed like she deserved. How's that for a /pol/ take GB2POL
>> [_] Anon 3456064 >># go back to pol polniggers need to leave redditfags need to leave normies need to leave Posting shit about politics is OK as long as you don´t overdo it, which /pol/acks tend to. Same with reddit. If you had not posted literal Prager U garbage hat propably would not have pissed people of that much. maybe post some nazi themed loop next time if you have to post something political, everyone would be mostly ok with that, even Anons who hate nazis. Just do that next time, ok OP ?
>> [_] Anon 3456066 Imagine defending niggers lol
>> [_] Anon 3456067 >># Go back to /pol/. Or better yet, leave this site. You never belonged here.
>> [_] Anon 3456079 >># Dennis Prager is a filthy dago wop jew, but as far as those go, he's not so bad. Prager U definitely has some videos of merit, here's a good one https://www.youtube.com/watch/lNI07egoefc
>> [_] ta-kun 3456080 /f/rens you do realize that when you get baited into blowing up every single /pol/ flash into a virtual sticky you are just encouraging people to do it again? If you, stop responding to these.
>> [_] Anon 3456088 >># They rejected his message because he told them the truth.

File: What is Fake News.swf-(9.47 MB, 480x272, Other)
[_] Why? Anon 3273903 WHY?! Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anon 3273913 What do you mean why? This is somewhat pretty spot on on most points
>> [_] Anon 3273916 >># This was a good analysis. Even though Prager U cares too much about the tribe.
>> [_] Anon 3273921 I'm finding it more and more complicated to find newspapers or news websites that aren't actively trying to turn me into a raging SJW or a raging Nazi
>> [_] Anon 3273953 >># Why what? He's 100% fucking correct. The mainstream media are greedy, biased, tribalistic cunts.
>> [_] Anon 3273955 >guaranteed_replies.swf
>> [_] Anon 3273957 thats exactly happens in germany all the time
>> [_] Anon 3273964 >># You find it hard to not slide into extremism? Here is a hint, stop giving a fuck and don't be an asshole, done
>> [_] Anon 3273969 I detect a right bias, focusing solely on the left, instead of lies and cherry-picking done by both sides. Notice how he mentions 7% of journalists are only Rep's and implies that the rest are Dem's? Misleading, in other words, fake news, according to the source they are using The American Journalist in the Digital Age by Willnat and Weaver 2013, 50% is "Independent", only 28% identify as Democrat, and 15% as "Other". They show a clear bias towards the right, so also fake news? Not really always the case, sure a bias is part of the picture, but so is factual reporting. If certain outlets use quotes out of context, omit or downplay facts to fit their narrative and select only certain examples or samples to fit facts to conclusions whether then other way around. And yes, I will mention Fox even if this PragerOpinionPiece dude, tries to write it off, Fox has not a great track record when it comes to things mentioned above, and is certainly "mainstream republican" unless you slowly start drifting to extremism aka Breitbart/Infowars. Not saying the left doesn't have extremist corners or media outlets that take the standard of factual reporting on similar levels like Fox, but the process of yelling fake news at everything being put out by the MSM is as worthless as this video. Sorry, there are no shortcuts to well informed opinions, learn what to trust, what to doubt and what to research unlike a political sheep everyone wants you to be, regardless of side.
>> [_] Anon 3273988 >># You either learn what stinks with a measure of common sense, and avoid certain outlets and authors, or you sit back in the safety of your home as the torches start lighting up. There is no alternative. Hell, most outlets are just fine, especially very generic variety ones. You just have to learn how to spot a few keywords, a few phrases, a few tactics that the same filth always uses. Lefties always appeal to emotion either positively or negatively, guilting and socially excluding you until you submit. They point their fingers at naughty people and call out to you to publicly shame them, because "that is obviously the right thing to do." Righties, on the other hand, aggrandize their own cause and very specifically point out the mistakes of others, especially known persona. They appeal to fact over emotion, although fact does not necessarily always have to be true. They also tend to echo a lot less. That, however, does not mean that every news agency out there is either a jewish slave or a nazi fucker and nothing but. That one article written by a very dubious author with very dubious connections pops up does not inherently invalidate all the others. It's a part of normalization, and another trait of the lefties - they pepper their agenda pushing out inbetween normal, universally acceptable articles so as to make it seem more mundane, more normal. Again, emotion, or sociology over fact. It's ironic that, the sides have switched, with the right now being rebels.
>> [_] Anon 3273997 Take it to /pol/, faggots. Post animu or gtfo.
>> [_] Anon 3274024 >># Good video, >># See this is a shill, if you point out lefty bias you are biased to the right. Which is not true in the slightest. And if you are going to bring up statistics and "facts" site your sources faggot
>> [_] Anon 3274025 >># >extremism aka Breitbart/Infowars lol you really think they are extremist? Spotted the shill or brainwashed your choice
>> [_] Anon 3274028 >>>/pol/ fuck off

File: What is Fake News.swf-(9.47 MB, 480x272, Other)
[_] Relevant Anon 3272637 Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anon 3272639 Stop with this "relevant" bullshit, faggot. You're becoming another zeitgeist. We seriously need to shake chinamoot by the neck and get him to allow flash on /pol/ so we can perma-contain these fuckers.
>> [_] Anon 3272656 >># Yawn. Another conservative talking head complaining about leftist bias. You will never hear him complain about Fox News though. Idk I didnt bother watching it. Why should I? This "university" was founded by a conservatard who thinks that the ten commandments forms the basis of all law in the world.
>> [_] Anon 3272657 >># They complain about leftist bias because it's overwhelming compared to the right. Fox is a minority. This is more about making people realize how biased pretty much every news source is, and not about complaining how the right's views aren't represented in good light.
>> [_] Anon 3272658 >># oh gee, I wonder if he is biased as well
>> [_] Anon 3272659 >># >PragerU Jesus Christ. If you're going to post videos from bullshit artists at least pick valuably respectable ones.
>> [_] Anon 3272669 ironic how this guy talks about confirmation bias yet he has his own huge level of confirmation bias that the left is someone universally far more extreme than the right also ironic how he cherrypicks examples. What a fucking hypocrite, this could've been a great video too if this guy wasn't so biased.
>> [_] Anon 3272673 >not realizing all media isn't biased towards corporations and US empire ISHYGDDT
>> [_] Anon 3272678 >all American media is biased >but the only problem is LEFTIST PROPAGANDA It's just the modern day equivalent of the red-menace. It's boring and uninformed. Keep it on shit-tier boards where it belongs.
>> [_] Anon 3272690 >watching the news >being american
>> [_] Anon 3272726 People still watch TV?
>> [_] Anon 3272727 Thanks for the good video. There are a LOT of Shills on here who try and make it seem like FAKE NEWS is not an issue.
>> [_] Anon 3272730 >># You missed the point, 99.99% is leftist. Communists killed 100 million people, you should listen to this ex-KGB talk about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3nXvScR azg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3ba jd4 complete interview
>> [_] Anon 3272736 >># >It doesn't matter if the news reported is factual or incorrect, 90% of it is leftist propaganda wow, just wow. "It doesn't matter if it's true or not, if it's not said by my party's spokesperson it's fake news"
>> [_] Anon 3272739 >># wait calling news that isn't true "fake news" is wrong?
>> [_] Anon 3272742 Back to /pol/ with you. BEGONE!
>> [_] Anon 3272781 Here's a decent explanation of the terms I came across a bit ago in a report. >Information (or influence) operations: Actions taken by governments or organized non-state actors to distort domestic or foreign political sentiment, most frequently to achieve a strategic and/or geopolitical outcome. These operations can use a combination of methods, such as false news, disinformation or networks of fake accounts (false amplifiers) aimed at manipulating public opinion. >False news: News articles that purport to be factual, but which contain intentional misstatements of fact with the intention to arouse passions, attract viewership or deceive. >False amplifiers: Coordinated activity by inauthentic accounts with the intent of manipulating political discussion (e.g., by discouraging specific parties from participating in discussion, or amplifying sensationalistic voices over others). >Disinformation: Inaccurate or manipulated information/content that is spread intentionally. This can include false news, or it can involve more subtle methods, such as false flag operations, feeding inaccurate quotes or stories to innocent intermediaries or knowingly amplifying biased or misleading information. Disinformation is distinct from misinformation, which is the inadvertent or unintentional spread of inaccurate information without malicious intent.

File: What is Fake News.swf-(9.47 MB, 480x272, Other)
[_] Anon 3259137 Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anon 3259166 the coverage of blm would be a better example
>> [_] Anon 3259168 >># I wish PragerU would name the Jew. Also TWO SCOOPS BLUMPF
>> [_] Anon 3259169 This dude is a moron
>> [_] Anon 3259171 I don't understand when right-wingers call leftists biased (and vice-versa) when they themselves are biased. "Agendas" aren't exclusive to one side. CNN has an agenda but so does PragerU, so I don't know why PragerU should be exempt from being called biased or fake. The guy's making a contradictory argument.
>> [_] Anon 3259172 >># >so I don't know why PragerU should be exempt from being called biased or fake I should add: "by the guy's logic"
>> [_] Anon 3259175 >># Did he argue that PragerU doesn't have an agenda? Because as an anti-liberal, I realize that places like Fox News and Breitbart are pushing an agenda. Yet somehow, these are the only two places, which aren't explicitly far-left, that ever get called out for "being biased". Practically the entirety of American MSM is dominated by far-left assholes pushing far-left agendas, who either refuse to publish any actual news that doesn't support their narrative, or on the rare occasion they do, is so biased that the actual facts don't appear until the last paragraph of the story. There's nothing worse than some faggot screaming "FAUX NEWS" while unironically believing in the Washington Post.
>> [_] Anon 3259176 Getting your news from multiple sources is always better.
>> [_] Anon 3259178 >># >Did he argue that PragerU doesn't have an agenda? But is he not saying that fake news is fake merely because it's biased? By that logic, what's stopping me from calling PragerU fake information because it's biased towards the right of center, thus invalidating the whole video? >Yet somehow, these are the only two places, which aren't explicitly far-left, that ever get called out for "being biased". Probably because there are more young people on the internet meaning there are more leftists on the internet meaning there will be less people calling out leftist bias because there are more people who are okay with it because they agree with it.
>> [_] Anon 3259179 >># Not necessarily. If you read WaPo, NYT, and CNN, you're going to get the exact same fake news repeated three times. It's better to understand exactly what narrative each outlet is trying to push. You sure as shit don't want to read Al Jazerra for information having to deal with Muslims, or RT expecting to get honest reporting about anything having to do with Russia.
>> [_] Anon 3259181 >># >But is he not saying that fake news is fake merely because it's biased? By that logic, what's stopping me from calling PragerU fake information because it's biased towards the right of center, thus invalidating the whole video? Is this bait? They don't deny being right of center, any more than Fox News doesn't pretend that they're not conservative. He's saying that the entire concept of "news" is pushing narratives in order to sway public opinion. What's stopping you from calling PragerU fake information is because you can actually look at the various bias and scandals of major media outlets, and see that he's right. You don't have to take their word for it, or their spin on it. The fact that PragerU actually admits this already makes them more trustworthy that practically every other media outlet.
>> [_] Anon 3259182 >># The difference is that Prager U isnt fucking lying.
>> [_] Anon 3259183 >># 15% Ident of Faggots
>> [_] Anon 3259184 >># >They don't deny being right of center, any more than Fox News doesn't pretend that they're not conservative. Except I'm not saying that PragerU denies being right of center. I'm saying that they're biased, and thus, according to the man's logic, they're fake. Just because you admit you're biased doesn't stop you from being biased. The ending statements are literally "It's called bias. It's called fake news."
>> [_] Anon 3259189 >># If you aren't pulling information from a multitude of places to piece together the fact and form your own opinion then I don't know what to tell you. I don't watch news for their shitty agendas or what they stand for, just like I don't read what journalists publish because "I think like they do." People making such a big fucking fuss over how the news is reported, and by who, instead of what is being reported is exactly why the media as a whole is a contemptible cesspool of opinionated garbage. This is the double-edged sword of freedom of speech. Information is overly abundant but it's your responsibility and duty as a democratic citizen to be able to critically analyze what's out there and have an informed opinion. My reaction to what is reported on MSNBC, Fox, CBS, etc is more or less the same among all of them; they'll say things that are flat-out wrong and I will want to fucking gouge my eyes out and then after they drop their paid opinions they'll slip in factual data, the only part I care about. Gotta say though, had to stop watching Fox altogether after what's-his-fuck said foreign collusion isn't illegal. NBC's still shitting the bed on the other end, though, as they keep talking about collusion even though the investigation only involves obstruction. It can't be helped. Sensationalism pays.
>> [_] Anon 3259190 >># >The fact that PragerU actually admits this already makes them more trustworthy that practically every other media outlet. Whether they're being truthful or deceitful about fucking you in the ass, they're still fucking you in the ass either way. It's not much of a difference.
>> [_] Anon 3259192 >># If your dozens of "places to piece together the fact" are all owned by the exact same assholes pushing the exact same narrative, then you're not doing yourself any favors. http://static2.businessinsider.com/image /4fd9ee1e6bb3f7af5700000a/media-infograph ic.jpg
>> [_] Anon 3259196 >># Thankfully I go to almost all of them with some indies and freelancers in there, too. Can we talk about how oligarchy is disgusting?
>> [_] Anon 3259199 >># >># >># Textbook examples of the disingenuous tactic "Reductio ad Absurdum". Look it the fuck up. Yeah, got our eyes on you. Also, look up "Res Ipsa Loquitur" (the LITERAL meaning, not the legal context). PragerU oozes it. That's how you can tell the difference, if you've half a wit about you. If not, you're Occupying some shit or another on a convenience schedule.
>> [_] Anon 3259202 >># We can. I don't disagree with the importance of forming an opinion based on different sources, but what many people believe to be "different sources" tend to be all the same exact shit under some different name. And pretty much anything that isn't Fox, Brietbart, or some indie investigative journalist are all pushing the exact same narrative. European media re-reports their far-left narratives, so isn't much better. Fox and Brietbart each push different narratives, but they're both singular entities so you have less to worry about them just going along with the mainstream.
>> [_] Anon 3259206 While I see his valid concern that one narrative is getting much more coverage then any other narrative his conclusion that this makes it fake news is nonsensical because this would make all sources of information "fake news". if all news is "fake news" then none is and this is clearly not the the case. Some sources of information are more reliable then others and the idea that a source having a bias discredits it entirely is about as useful as the idea that no source has bias. Basically his facts are straight but he fails to make a feasible call to action because of his nonsense conclusion.
>> [_] Anon 3259207 >># >Textbook examples of the disingenuous tactic "Reductio ad Absurdum". I hope you're not implying that I am misrepresenting what the man is saying. I have explained it thrice already and every time you've misrepresented what I have said. Please explain to me how "Mainstream American news is all fake because the major news outlets are so consistently biased toward the left that whether any given story they report is factual or not, their overall reportage is essentially leftist propaganda." and "That’s called confirming your own prejudices. It’s called bias. It’s called fake news." does not imply "fake news is biased news."
>> [_] Anon 3259208 >># In America, our mainstream media is overwhelmingly liberal, and overwhelmingly controlled by people with direct ties to the Democratic party. This is important to realize when you see every mainstream media outlet pushing some narrative like "MUH RUSSIA". You can't just say "Well look at all these media outlets reporting the exact same thing on this thing, it MUST be true!"
>> [_] Anon 3259209 >># You make a fair point but unfortunately PragerU never bothers to make the same point you do, it only attempts to discredit mainstream media by pointing out that it has a bias
>> [_] Anon 3259210 >># Because the mainstream media has the exact same liberal bias, pushing the exact same liberal narratives. Pretty much the only exception is FOX, and yet, they're the only ones who ever get accused of bias for not going along with the same narrative as everyone else.
>> [_] Anon 3259217 ITT: Unicorn Hunters. It works like this. The left declares UNICORNS!! and organizes a hunt. The right goes *ahem* and points out that unicorns are mythical, and it is therefore absurd to "hunt" them. The left writhes and hisses "absence of evidence IS NOT evidence of absence!!" while they wave their unicorn nets and demand we all stop what we're doing while we all "get to the bottom of it". The right cringes as the left parades around with pictures of unicorns they painted, PROVING that there's something to hunt. Wash, rinse, repeat. Sound familiar?
>> [_] Anon 3259221 I need a news source that's dedicated to simply describing events that have occured in the most detailed but also neutral way possible with no added author or reporter commentary. I just dont care about the opinions. I'm tired of hearing about this constant battle between news itself just give me raw data and I'll evaluate it.
>> [_] Anon 3259222 >># content free allegory that portrays the opposing side as ignorant without supporting the claim in anyway. kind of ironic given the rights traditional dismissal of scientific evidence, particularly regarding climate change
>> [_] Anon 3259223 >believing the washington post has any credability at all, especially since the own has a $600 million secret contract with the CIA https://web.archive.org/web/201701072354 14/https://www.thenation.com/article/amaz on-washington-post-and-600-million-cia-co ntract/
>> [_] Anon 3259225 >># Tell me more about how gender is a spectrum, traits are entirely a result of environment and upbringing, and how there's no link between genetics and IQ, my fellow enlightened leftist.
>> [_] Anon 3259226 >># You know I was never actually taught much about climate change. I was simply told "temperatures are rising and so is CO2, therefore climate change!" And past that point in elementary school all I ever read in higher education was fiction about what would happen if humanity didn't get off of using oil. Would you mind explaining the evidence for it?
>> [_] Anon 3259229 >># No who you're responding to, but this is the best source I've read on the subject: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ The argument shouldn't be "Is global warming real?", it should be: "What effect does the exponential emissions of greenhouse gasses such as CO2 byproducts have on the planet?" "How can we monitor these changes?" "What is the risk that these things pose?" "What is a reasonable response to these possible risks?" Libtards and neocons think it's some sort of "believe it or don't" thing, when it should continue to be an area of ongoing research, in order to see how well past models match up with data, as well as formulate intelligent solutions to any possible negative effects that might arise. t. physical scientist
>> [_] Anon 3259230 The short and skinny of News Media is that most people's political opinions revolve around certain principles or convictions which aren't easily swayed by reporting, biased or not. Mass Media's real power isn't molding people's opinions. For instance, a story about a cop shooting a black man doesn't change your average person's perception of law enforcement or racism. Those beliefs have been set before the story is written and promulgated. Media's real power is 'Agenda Setting'. I.E. choosing what IS and just as importantly what IS NOT displayed across millions of screens. Media essentially sets the stage and chooses the terms on which topics will be discussed (the Overton Window). By choosing certain stories while ignoring others, the perception of millions of people can be slanted without actually changing their convictions.
>> [_] Anon 3259231 >># But the second thing you said obviously affects the first. That's why there still exist people who believe that there's some sort of "black genocide" going on, propagated by police officers, who previously never had an opinion on such a ridiculous concept.
>> [_] Anon 3259232 >># >using IQ as a reliable method of measuring intelligence
>> [_] Anon 3259233 >># >thinking people with low IQs are intelligent It's far from perfect, but every single aspect of genetic research has shown a strong link between genetics and intelligence. We're just starting to discover what sequences correspond to intelligence, and I'm really hoping so-called "progressives" don't end up shutting it down.
>> [_] Anon 3259234 >># Not really. In such a case the news media only gave shape to an already existing but unformed subliminal understanding of the issue.
>> [_] Anon 3259235 >># No, that shit only became mainstream with the Zimmerman case. We didn't have daily protests in the 90s over whatever retarded criminal dindu got shot by cops.
>> [_] Anon 3259236 >># If I may expand. The news media in your hypothetical example did not come to make the man believe that blacks were facing injustice or oppression by the state, he had already believed such a thing, but News Media gave him the terms to express his beliefs. Instead of a nebulous conception of "the man has got the black man down" it's given a concrete context to frame those opinions and becomes "the police are murdering black men with impunity" Does that make sense?
>> [_] Anon 3259239 >># Yes, but I fail to see a functional difference. >the man believe that blacks were facing injustice or oppression by the state EVERYONE feels like they're being oppressed by the state. When I get a third of my income taken from me in taxes, I feel like I'm being oppressed by the state. When millionares have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in their income to pay for niggers every single year, they feel oppressed by the state. When niggers their free food stamps cut, they feel oppressed by the state. When chinks have to perform x3 as well as everyone else just to get into state schools, they feel oppressed by the state. The only thing that the media's been pushing for the last decade is imaginary nignog oppression, when actual oppression exists, based on races beyond black/white, economics, etc. That creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
>> [_] Anon 3259243 >># >No, that shit only became mainstream with the Zimmerman case Were you not alive for Rodney King? >># The functional difference is that giving shape to an already held belief is NOT the same thing as changing someone's convictions. News Media decides on what ground a social issue is discussed on (in the case of race relations it's recently been extra-judicial killings by police), but choosing the CONTEXT of that debate isn't the same as creating the underlying social conditions that caused it to be an issue in the first place. You're putting the cart before the horse. You're pointing to Media representation as instilling beliefs into people when in reality those beliefs existed before they were given a context to be expressed.
>> [_] Anon 3259246 >># Biased news become fake news when the reporters start pretending they are the only trustworthy sources, and attack anyone who goes against the bias, regardless of if the one going against the bias is doing so on a factual basis or not. When you have people acting like 'If you don't agree with what I say, then you must be wrong', that goes from bias to blinded by an echo chamber. The overall difference is, MSM won't take criticism, and the ones like Prager U will.
>> [_] Anon 3259247 >># >dismissal of scientific evidence, particularly regarding climate change such as what the left does with any data that points away from anthropogenic climate change, or what sort of extreme measures the left is demanding to make what amounts to trying to cool off a high rise apartment complex with one window mounted air conditioner that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars.
>> [_] Anon 3259248 >># Few people had prior convictions on "white police officers killing black criminals" prior to the media's hilariously biased exposure to that imaginary "issue". From there it goes into two directions: 1. People who unironically believe the MSM, and believe there is some police-drive genocide against niggers. 2. People who actually look at the statistics behind both crime and police killings, instead of the anecdotes that the MSM pushes. The flaw in your argument is assuming that everyone already had a hard-set opinion on literally everything before our idiotic media decides to spin it into some retarded narrative. I mean, who the hell would have some dumbass opinion on a thing like "trump is a secret KGB agent" before the MSM started pushing this narrative? Nobody had any prior convictions on whether or not Donald Trump was one of Putin's top operatives until the MSM started pushing this shit.
>> [_] Anon 3259250 >># Why is he so bald?
>> [_] Anon 3259251 >># >Few people had prior convictions on "white police officers killing black criminals" That's the context, not the conviction. The conviction is the person's deeply held beliefs towards race relations/institutional racism in general which if you look back in our history you'll notice it has been an incredibly prominent topic in the American political & social debate for more than 200 years. This is merely the contemporary incarnation of a debate that bedeviled even the founding fathers when discussing the terms of slavery and personhood for blacks. Your post seems as though you are unable to untangle the concept of CONTEXT from CONVICTION.
>> [_] Anon 3259252 Get your coats on for the climate change! US will be frozen over in 40 years!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq6fDa9J rzQ
>> [_] Anon 3259253 >># >This is merely the contemporary incarnation of a debate But it's not a debate in the media. It's literally "some criminal nigger was shot again after assaulting officers, but HE WAS A GOOD BOI DINDU MUFFIN OUT SPREADING THE WORD OF JESUS CHRIST NEED MO MONEY FO DEM PROGRAMS" Literally, the only side that is presented is the DINDU one, and as soon as actual evidence comes out that he actually DIDU something, it's either completely dropped, or they just focus on the protesting, instead of the actual evidence of the case.
>> [_] Anon 3259254 >># Ironic shitposting is still shitposting.
>> [_] Anon 3259256 >># It's not shitposting.
>> [_] Anon 3259258 >># Then refer to >>#
>> [_] Anon 3259259 >># Let's analyze this: >"content free" as it were, though you seem to be able to ascribe known components to the elements of allegory neutral 3rd-party overview of two opposing sides given under neutral context Well.. if you somehow see the narrator as supporting one of those sides over the other, you are exhibiting the pathos of projection. Your commentary makes it clear that your perception is heavily colored by a certain bias. I leave it as an exercise for the astute reader to determine your flavor of bias: Logic, or Emotion.
>> [_] Anon 3259261 >># The ongoing debate is not only on the panels of pundits delivering their opinions from on high, or the newspaper editorials, but also the discussion we're having now as well as the million threads on /pol/ discussing the Zimmerman Trial, the conversations you've had with schoolmates or friends or parents, and the public demonstrations by "black lives matter" and "blue lives matter" airing their own interpretations of the same context. What's important to notice is that whatever side you're on, you're still following the beck and call of the mass media simply by unwittingly agreeing to discuss the issue on the terms which they have framed the issue.
>> [_] Anon 3259263 >># >neutral 3rd-party overview of two opposing sides given under neutral context Not the guy you're responding to, but the post you're referring is to clearly not a 'neutral third-party overview'. It's a bad political cartoon in post form, 'the right' is portrayed as the collected straight man literally 'cringing' at the ridiculous antics of a manic 'left'
>> [_] Anon 3259264 >># they're doing in this video exactly what the claim of "The left"
>> [_] Anon 3259267 >># >but also the discussion we're having now as well as the million threads on /pol/ discussing the Zimmerman Trial, the conversations you've had with schoolmates or friends or parents, and the public demonstrations by "black lives matter" and "blue lives matter" airing their own interpretations of the same context. None of which have the same reach as the MSM. >What's important to notice is that whatever side you're on, you're still following the beck and call of the mass media simply by unwittingly agreeing to discuss the issue on the terms which they have framed the issue. Except that they quite clearly chose a side from the very start. People are increasingly talking less about the issues, and talking more about how shit the media is.
>> [_] Anon 3259268 >># AAAaaaand the vicious wheel of Reductio Ad Absurdum spins back around once again...
>> [_] Anon 3259269 >># You're defeating your own argument by acknowledging how poor the Media is at actually changing people's beliefs which was my point at the beginning of this whole debate.
>> [_] Anon 3259271 >># By "they" I quite obviously meant "the media". Anyone who bothered to watch the trial itself saw that Zimmerman was 100% innocent. The fact that people still hold Trayvon up as an example of "anti-black discrimination" is entirely the fault of our shit media.
>> [_] Anon 3259272 >># Protip anon: Spouting "reductio ad absurdum" isn't a counterargument to his post, nor is it impressing anyone either
>> [_] Anon 3259273 >># He's right, though. I'm not going to repeat myself, or repeat him. Just scroll up and rewatch the video.
>> [_] Anon 3259274 >># >pointing to a stone and calling it a "stone" Yes, I can see how that becomes tedious. Shall I call it a "flower" next time it rears its ugly head?
>> [_] Anon 3259275 >># You're still not getting it. The lines in the Zimmerman affair were drawn before it even happened. The division is reflective of a preexisting divide in the attitudes and beliefs of Americans towards the justice system, not of an imaginary divide of 'people who studied the case and people who didn't'.
>> [_] Anon 3259276 Just your daily reminder, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/ App/Settings/poster_image_highs/000/000/0 01/original/FallaciesPosterHigherRes.jpg
>> [_] Anon 3259278 >># >The lines in the Zimmerman affair were drawn before it even happened. They weren't. >The division is reflective of a preexisting divide in the attitudes and beliefs of Americans towards the justice system They're not. >not of an imaginary divide of 'people who studied the case and people who didn't'. They are. The media literally turned a spic into a "white person", complete with editing his phone call to the police to make him look "racist", failed to report every aspect that proved his innocence, and decided to go with "LOL RACISM" instead. The people who actually paid attention to the trial realized he was innocent, and people who only read the media reports decided "he's a KKK white nationalist who aborted an innocent black fetus." It was quite literally my last straw into media bias, the point where I could never take the mainstream media seriously ever again.
>> [_] Anon 3259281 >># I'd really rather not go over the same point that's already been made. >># You've got such a narrow view of topic of media influence. I'm afraid you don't have anything insightful to say on the topic.
>> [_] Anon 3259286 >># >I'd really rather not go over the same point that's already been made. Good, then in the future, stop being wrong and wasting everyone's time.
>> [_] Anon 3259287 >># This entire conversation has been you not being able to understand the difference between context and conviction. I'm absolutely positive you've never done any serious academic reading on media influence.
>> [_] Anon 3259288 >># Your entire argument is that people were already decided on shit that they had never even thought about before our shit media decided to make it an issue. That's not even internally logical.
>> [_] Anon 3259290 So what is it?
>> [_] Anon 3259291 >># >The difference is that Prager U isnt fucking lying. By the dude's own definition, he is. maybe you should rewatch the video, with a little critical thinking next time.
>> [_] Anon 3259293 >># >Dude, I work for the media, and the media is full of shit >DUDE HE WORKS FOR THE MEDIA THEREFORE HE'S FULL OF SHIT THEREFORE THE MEDIA IS TRUSTWORTHY It's depressing knowing that people as retarded as you exist.
>> [_] Anon 3259296 >># no one is saying the media is trustworthy, nice strawman there
>> [_] Anon 3259297 >># People generally develop their deeply held beliefs from their environment. Friends & family, school & church. Not from news media. Which explains why even though news media is disproportionately left leaning the general population isn't because the general population doesn't get their convictions from how news is reported. Issues like the Zimmerman trial don't happen in a vacuum. People already have developed attitudes and beliefs on their opinions of race relations and the justice system BEFORE an issue happens that vault those contentious issues in the spotlight. The Zimmerman trial is the CONTEXT by which the PREEXISTING CONVICTIONS that people ALREADY HAVE are made visible.
>> [_] Anon 3259298 >># Then you agree with him, so what are you shitposting about?
>> [_] Anon 3259299 >># >People generally develop their deeply held beliefs from their environment. Friends & family, school & church. Not from news media. Then you have no idea how propaganda works, and the liberal MSM is absolutely nothing more than liberal propaganda. You can literally see the de-evolution of human beings when they get out of highschool, to the time they're a year into their liberal arts degree.
>> [_] Anon 3259300 >># they didn't argue that genetics aren't linked to intelligence, you dumbass, they said that IQ isn't a reliable test of intelligence. IQ tests have NOTHING to do with genetics
>> [_] Anon 3259302 >># >IQ is related to intelligence >intelligence is related to genetics >somehow IQ has nothing to do with genetics What did this retard mean by this?
>> [_] Anon 3259303 This, I'm a liberal, and I hate how so many other "liberals" are just as bad or worse than there conservative counterparts.
>> [_] Anon 3259304 >># I'm afraid you have no idea how socialization works, my friend. People seek out information that confirms their biases. In your case, you get your news from /pol/ to mediate raw information to an ideologically statisfactory interpretation. If someone wants a traditional conservative outlook they turn on fox news and so on. The fact that people aren't passive consumers of news, but agents looking to reinforce their deeply held convictions blunts the effectiveness of news media as a form of partisan propaganda.
>> [_] Anon 3259305 Well, well... this has certainly devolved into a 19-way Mexican standoff. Just waiting to see who flinches first. Tomorrow: lone hunter discovers 19 dead bodies in the arroyo, and snatches up all the money.
>> [_] Anon 3259306 >># >People seek out information that confirms their biases. And the fact that you think that's the only psychological element at play makes you a complete retard.
>> [_] Anon 3259307 >># Oh please, share your wisdom enlightened one. Throw open the curtains on my ignorance and show me the light.
>> [_] Anon 3259311 >># I've never seen one before, no one has, but I'm guessing it's a /pol/-bait thread.
>> [_] Anon 3259312 >># A /pol/-bait thread?
>> [_] Anon 3259313 >># Here you go, you fucking retard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co gnitive_biases
>> [_] Anon 3259314 >># Linking a wikipedia page is not a substitute for an argument, /pol/-friend.
>> [_] Anon 3259315 >># Every good thread as an equal and opposite /pol/-bait thread. A good thread brings flashes of worth to the board, a /pol/-bait thread brings video rips and triple digit reply counts.
>> [_] Anon 3259316 >># Something's spewing /pol/, into /f/?
>> [_] Anon 3259317 >># >only one form of cognitive bias exists! >No, actually many do >Prove it! >Okay >REEEEEE WIKIPEDIA Fuck off.
>> [_] Anon 3259318 >># because you can't claim the media is biased therefore fake which implies that you yourself making the argument is fake because you're biased. it's self-refuting idea, you know, literally "ideas or statements whose falsehood is a logical consequence of the act or situation of holding them to be true" you can't just write this post off as a fallacious reductio ad absurdum when nothing is being strawmanned, you can watch the video yourself and clearly see he's equating bias with falsehood.
>> [_] Anon 3259321 >># Precisely. That's why we're expereincing these curious /pol/-bait phenomena on /f/.
>> [_] Anon 3259322 >># So what is it?
>> [_] Anon 3259323 >># You're assuming that he's using himself as evidence. He's not. Now stop shitposting.
>> [_] Anon 3259324 >># I've never seen one before, no one has, but I'm guessing it's a /pol/-bait thread.
>> [_] Anon 3259325 >># I've never seen one before - no one has - but I'm guessing it's a White Power hole.
>> [_] Anon 3259326 >># A White Power hole?
>> [_] Anon 3259327 >># So it's decided then; we consult Hiro.
>> [_] Anon 3259328 >># https://www.youtube.com/user/PragerUnive rsity/videos is this not media, anon?
>> [_] Anon 3259329 >># Like just then when /pol/ baited itself.
>> [_] Anon 3259330 >># Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A nigger hole sucks time and matter out of the Universe; a White Power hole returns it.
>> [_] Anon 3259331 >># >only one form of cognitive bias exists! Now you're being purposely obtuse. I used a specific example of a cognitive bias that was applicable to the argument at hand. When you dismissed the post out of hand I invited you to explain further assuming you would relate your own specific examples that would refute the point. You responded with a wikipedia page, entirely side stepping the point. There's no need to act like a little kid about this and purposely misrepresent my posts to declare yourself 'the winner'.
>> [_] Anon 3259333 >># >># Hey wait a minute! I missed the discussion!
>> [_] Anon 3259334 >># You're assuming that he's using himself as evidence. He's not. Now stop shitposting.
>> [_] Anon 3259336 >># Precisely. That's why we're experiencing these curious White Power phenomena on this board.
>> [_] Anon 3259337 >># I think we've experienced this period of time before, sir.
>> [_] Anon 3259338 >># What time phenomena?
>> [_] Anon 3259339 SIEG HEIL only joking :D
>> [_] Anon 3259341 >># Like just then, when white power repeated itself.
>> [_] Anon 3259343 >># So, what is it?
>> [_] Anon 3259344 >># Oh would someone punch punch him out?
>> [_] Anon 3259345 >># he doesn't have to explicitly use himself as evidence for it to be contradictory, in fact that makes it even more malicious when he's implying that "you shouldn't listen to THIS media but you should listen to OUR media" this video is clearly trying to lead you somewhere, therefore it's biased, therefore it's fake and shouldn't be trusted, do you seriously find that to be true, anon? i'm not arguing that the media is trustworthy, i'm arguing that his logic is stupid and misleading
>> [_] Anon 3259346 >># Okay, so it's decided then. We consult Hitler.
>> [_] Anon 3259347 >># New is occurring in random pockets. A story no longer leads to truth.
>> [_] Anon 3259349 >># He made a general statement about media in general, which is objectively true, and can be verified by sources which aren't media companies. I'm sorry if the very idea that objective facts exist is too much for your social constructivist mind to take in, but please take a good long, hard look at yourself.
>> [_] Anon 3259350 >># I'll heil to that.
>> [_] Anon 3259351 >jewtuberip >/pol/ related >over 100 replies why does this keep happening?
>> [_] Anon 3259352 >># So, that thing's spewing White Power...
>> [_] Anon 3259354 >># I think we've experienced this period of time before, sir. >>#
>> [_] Anon 3259355 >># Hey wait a minute, I missed the white power!
>> [_] Anon 3259357 >># Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A nigger hole sucks time and matter out of the Universe; a White Power hole returns it.
>> [_] Anon 3259361 >># Only trolling!