6 ms·

Unsurprising, considering who belongs in which camp.

by MrBuddyCasino 4y ago

treis 4y ago
[flagged]
- goodpoint 4y ago
  A broken clock...
- SllX 4y ago
  Somebody asks the right question but if it’s the wrong person asking the right question, it’s now a “conspiracy theory”. Sometimes the person asking the question is a genuine jackass and sometimes they’re merely of a different partisan persuasion; but if you’re willing to ignore the person and address it, you might find it’s worth checking into anyway.
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  Not sure about the middle point, but I'm still waiting for the other two? Hunter Biden had a laptop, but nothing illegal or unethical was on it. And lab leak remains completely evidence free. If you have actual evidence to the contrary I'd be happy to see it. But ever time I've asked in the past...
  - seti0Cha 4y ago
    Already posted this on another comment, but that last sentence makes me want to make sure you see it. Summary here: https://reason.com/2022/03/17/the-new-york-times-belatedly-admits-the-emails-on-hunter-bidens-abandoned-laptop-are-real-and-newsworthy/ https://reason.com/2022/03/17/the-new-york-times-belatedly-a... Referenced NYT article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-bill-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-... tldr; NYTimes now says the emails have been authenticated. Make of it what you will.
- subsubzero 4y ago
  Also don't forget the medias reporting of covid: Jan-Feb 2020 - Masks don't work! don't worry about covid, get a flu shot! April 2020 - Covid lives on surfaces for 17 days, disinfect all surfaces, also all masks are effective against covid spread(even cloth ones!) Early 2021 - Vaccines(pfizer, moderna) will stop symptomatic covid with +90% effectiveness, also you have to have a vaccine otherwise you will spread covid to others. Late 2021 - Oops, cloth masks are not effective against covid(omicron), also vaccines for young children wear off in terms of effectiveness after a few weeks.
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    I'm not saying the media is blameless, but this seems like a lot of post-hoc thinking - you're treating the media like they should have known that omicron would exist and so they shouldn't have reported the effectiveness of the vaccines on earlier strains, or reported whatever was the current understood science of the time because things later changed when they didn't know that.
  - antihipocrat 4y ago
    I suspect that if the implied interpretation of your observations was the majority view it would negatively affect the public's opinion of science and government agencies rather than the media.
    - HKH2 4y ago
      When they fail to investigate blatant inconsistencies, they are culpable.
- afavour 4y ago
  > Hunter Biden's laptop was dismissed as a hoax but turns out it's legit Does it? I'm genuinely not up to date here but the Hunter Biden laptop story was all about the supposedly explosive stuff stored on the laptop and I've still not seen any proof of that.
  - seti0Cha 4y ago
    The New York Times quietly acknowledged that the contents were probably legitimate in a story on a related subject. Unsurprisingly, it hasn't been a very high profile story in the mainstream media. edit: link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-bill-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-...
    - afavour 4y ago
      I guess I don’t really understand what you’re looking for here. You’re complaining about a lack of mainstream media coverage then pointing to mainstream media coverage. Typically papers write a follow up story when new facts have emerged, what new facts have emerged?
      - seti0Cha 4y ago
        > Typically papers write a follow up story when new facts have emerged, what new facts have emerged? Great question. What new facts HAVE emerged that caused the New York Times to change their stance on the provenance of these emails? Seems like a story should have been written about that, right? Unless no new facts did emerge, but that would be even more concerning, wouldn't it? That would mean they were either intentionally misleading people or changing their mind capriciously. It's bizarre to me the way people treat this as a non-issue. I myself wanted the story to be false because I didn't want it to cost Biden the election. I don't, however, approve of being mislead about things, even if I agree with the goals. This is doubly true for a news organization. It's a failure of their primary responsibility. edit: even more strange to get downvoted for saying this. I wish some of you who think poorly of what I said would offer a reason. I don't care about the internet points, but I'd like to know what the contrary position actually is.
bhawks 4y ago
Check the graphic in TFA. The trend is downwards across party lines. There was a bump (from 50s to 70s) for dems when trump was elected but it continued a downtrend from that peak - even while he was in office. The media industry ironically has a huge image problem - at its roots is the fact that their incentives do not align with their readership - they've actually made that readership a product to be sold to the highest bidder.
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
I would expect that the Democrats and Republicans are seeing the world (and the media) through blue- and red-tinted glasses. I would expect that the independents are, on average, seeing more clearly. And yet the independents see this much closer to how the Republicans see it. I find that somewhat surprising. Could be telling us that the most of the (non-Fox) media leans left, and the independents see it but the Democrats don't.
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  > Could be telling us that the most of the (non-Fox) media leans left, and the independents see it but the Democrats don't. Well, yeah. That big jump when Trump got elected isn't because the media suddenly became much more trustworthy and only the Democrats figured it out.
  - rainsford 4y ago
    Sure, but you could make a similar observation about the sudden Republican drop. Did the media suddenly become less trustworthy and only Republicans figured it out?
    - seti0Cha 4y ago
      That supports my point, not rebuts it. My thesis is that the media shifted to the left, causing Democrats to see them more favorably and Republicans to see them less favorably, and the drop and the gain both indicate that.
      - rainsford 4y ago
        I wasn't disagreeing with your thesis so much as pointing out that for both Republicans and Democrats, "trust" is more of a proxy for "does this coverage agree with my politics" (you might be making the same argument). I don't know if you can say it shows a media shift one way or the other though, since one could make a pretty strong argument that Trump was fairly terrible among Republican politicians and the media didn't have to move at all for his coverage to be worse and delight Democrats while angering Republicans.

Unsurprising, considering who belongs in which camp.

treis 4y ago

[flagged]

goodpoint 4y ago
A broken clock...
SllX 4y ago
Somebody asks the right question but if it’s the wrong person asking the right question, it’s now a “conspiracy theory”. Sometimes the person asking the question is a genuine jackass and sometimes they’re merely of a different partisan persuasion; but if you’re willing to ignore the person and address it, you might find it’s worth checking into anyway.
LatteLazy 4y ago
Not sure about the middle point, but I'm still waiting for the other two? Hunter Biden had a laptop, but nothing illegal or unethical was on it. And lab leak remains completely evidence free. If you have actual evidence to the contrary I'd be happy to see it. But ever time I've asked in the past...
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  Already posted this on another comment, but that last sentence makes me want to make sure you see it. Summary here: https://reason.com/2022/03/17/the-new-york-times-belatedly-admits-the-emails-on-hunter-bidens-abandoned-laptop-are-real-and-newsworthy/ https://reason.com/2022/03/17/the-new-york-times-belatedly-a... Referenced NYT article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-bill-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-... tldr; NYTimes now says the emails have been authenticated. Make of it what you will.
subsubzero 4y ago
Also don't forget the medias reporting of covid: Jan-Feb 2020 - Masks don't work! don't worry about covid, get a flu shot! April 2020 - Covid lives on surfaces for 17 days, disinfect all surfaces, also all masks are effective against covid spread(even cloth ones!) Early 2021 - Vaccines(pfizer, moderna) will stop symptomatic covid with +90% effectiveness, also you have to have a vaccine otherwise you will spread covid to others. Late 2021 - Oops, cloth masks are not effective against covid(omicron), also vaccines for young children wear off in terms of effectiveness after a few weeks.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  I'm not saying the media is blameless, but this seems like a lot of post-hoc thinking - you're treating the media like they should have known that omicron would exist and so they shouldn't have reported the effectiveness of the vaccines on earlier strains, or reported whatever was the current understood science of the time because things later changed when they didn't know that.
- antihipocrat 4y ago
  I suspect that if the implied interpretation of your observations was the majority view it would negatively affect the public's opinion of science and government agencies rather than the media.
  - HKH2 4y ago
    When they fail to investigate blatant inconsistencies, they are culpable.
afavour 4y ago
> Hunter Biden's laptop was dismissed as a hoax but turns out it's legit Does it? I'm genuinely not up to date here but the Hunter Biden laptop story was all about the supposedly explosive stuff stored on the laptop and I've still not seen any proof of that.
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  The New York Times quietly acknowledged that the contents were probably legitimate in a story on a related subject. Unsurprisingly, it hasn't been a very high profile story in the mainstream media. edit: link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-bill-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-...
  - afavour 4y ago
    I guess I don’t really understand what you’re looking for here. You’re complaining about a lack of mainstream media coverage then pointing to mainstream media coverage. Typically papers write a follow up story when new facts have emerged, what new facts have emerged?
    - seti0Cha 4y ago
      > Typically papers write a follow up story when new facts have emerged, what new facts have emerged? Great question. What new facts HAVE emerged that caused the New York Times to change their stance on the provenance of these emails? Seems like a story should have been written about that, right? Unless no new facts did emerge, but that would be even more concerning, wouldn't it? That would mean they were either intentionally misleading people or changing their mind capriciously. It's bizarre to me the way people treat this as a non-issue. I myself wanted the story to be false because I didn't want it to cost Biden the election. I don't, however, approve of being mislead about things, even if I agree with the goals. This is doubly true for a news organization. It's a failure of their primary responsibility. edit: even more strange to get downvoted for saying this. I wish some of you who think poorly of what I said would offer a reason. I don't care about the internet points, but I'd like to know what the contrary position actually is.

bhawks 4y ago

Check the graphic in TFA. The trend is downwards across party lines. There was a bump (from 50s to 70s) for dems when trump was elected but it continued a downtrend from that peak - even while he was in office. The media industry ironically has a huge image problem - at its roots is the fact that their incentives do not align with their readership - they've actually made that readership a product to be sold to the highest bidder.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

I would expect that the Democrats and Republicans are seeing the world (and the media) through blue- and red-tinted glasses. I would expect that the independents are, on average, seeing more clearly. And yet the independents see this much closer to how the Republicans see it. I find that somewhat surprising. Could be telling us that the most of the (non-Fox) media leans left, and the independents see it but the Democrats don't.

seti0Cha 4y ago
> Could be telling us that the most of the (non-Fox) media leans left, and the independents see it but the Democrats don't. Well, yeah. That big jump when Trump got elected isn't because the media suddenly became much more trustworthy and only the Democrats figured it out.
- rainsford 4y ago
  Sure, but you could make a similar observation about the sudden Republican drop. Did the media suddenly become less trustworthy and only Republicans figured it out?
  - seti0Cha 4y ago
    That supports my point, not rebuts it. My thesis is that the media shifted to the left, causing Democrats to see them more favorably and Republicans to see them less favorably, and the drop and the gain both indicate that.
    - rainsford 4y ago
      I wasn't disagreeing with your thesis so much as pointing out that for both Republicans and Democrats, "trust" is more of a proxy for "does this coverage agree with my politics" (you might be making the same argument). I don't know if you can say it shows a media shift one way or the other though, since one could make a pretty strong argument that Trump was fairly terrible among Republican politicians and the media didn't have to move at all for his coverage to be worse and delight Democrats while angering Republicans.