3 ms·
Carlson is a corporate establishment media host, yet you're willing to cherry-pick particular news items you find reliable from him, yet your framing doesn't of
by root_axis 4y ago
Carlson is a corporate establishment media host, yet you're willing to cherry-pick particular news items you find reliable from him, yet your framing doesn't offer other corporate establishment media figures the same benefit of the doubt.
I prefer not to get into the weeds on the particulars about who is exposing or responsible for "flat-out lies and falsehoods" - we won't agree, and that's ok, I'm not trying to dissuade you on that front, I am just pushing back against the rhetoric of your comment which suggests your news sources are inherently superior to those you malign, rather than they simply being a reflection of your political biases like everyone else.
- user3939382 4y agoIf there is a corporate media figure who is reporting with integrity on even a single issue, I would be happy to hear any recommendations, and follow them if only to hear them on that issue. At this point my standard is way below finding people I agree with. My standard is that I have some level of trust that they’re reporting things they believe to be true. Versus the opportunists we have throughout government and media who apparently have no personal beliefs or values and are willing to say or do anything to get ahead and appease the people signing their multimillion dollar checks.
- z3ncyberpunk 4y agowhy shouldn't you cherry pick the best coverage from all of them? I fail to see how that's a bad thing. A reflection of diverse and opposing political voices across and around the spectrum sounds pretty healthy, yet here you spit because of some pompous notion that the sources are worse than mainstream propaganda outlets? You are a silly person with silly opinions.
- root_axis 4y agoOne should seek out the best coverage, my point is that the "mainstream propaganda outlet" framing is selectively applied with respect to one's political bias, not with regard to any consistent meaning for the description "mainstream propaganda". >yet here you spit because of some pompous notion that the sources are worse than mainstream propaganda outlets? You are a silly person with silly opinions I won't deign to judge the silliness of your opinions and I didn't attack any of the sources, just compared them to others. Ironically, your "mainstream propaganda" key phrase is actually a popular propaganda tactic meant to poison the well rather than encourage critical thinking.