menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: Another protest
Page: 6 of 7
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/16/2017 8:07 PM
This guy is just bizarre.

Maybe he can run the country by effectively mobilizing his base. Doubtless there are a great number of people who'll stick with him no matter what.

But if he can't keep some of his promises, it could turn against him bigtime.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/standout-quotes-from-trumps-ma...

http://mashable.com/2017/02/16/trump-attacks-media-survey...


At some point, reality has meaning, doesn't it?
mail
OhioCatFan
2/16/2017 11:56 PM
I said that I've quit this thread, and I mostly have, but I couldn't resist this one:

Democrats Fall For Fake Tweet: https://tinyurl.com/hljwv8n
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/17/2017 12:02 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/journalists-react-president-trum...

Fuse length: 28 days.


OCF, you can't quit America and OHIO.









#can'ttaketheyeyesoffthetrainwreck
mail
OhioCatFan
2/17/2017 12:05 AM
A little more detail on this latest fake news story: https://tinyurl.com/h6mc5px
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/17/2017 12:09 AM
The source, apparently, had some appearance of being real. Not same for what Trump says.


And they apologized as soon as they found out, instead of insisting they were right and keeping on saying it.



There's integrity, legit efforts at integrity...and there's the opposite.
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/17/2017 7:39 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
The source, apparently, had some appearance of being real. Not same for what Trump says.


And they apologized as soon as they found out, instead of insisting they were right and keeping on saying it.



There's integrity, legit efforts at integrity...and there's the opposite.
I have never used twitter,so this comment is based on news reports.

From what the reporters were saying,a teenager could tell the tweets weren't legit.

Yes,after being exposed,the democrats issued an apology.
But,they and especially the N.Y.Times should have done their due diligence,instead of jumping on what they thought was a "gotcha" moment.
mail
DelBobcat
2/17/2017 9:44 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
The source, apparently, had some appearance of being real. Not same for what Trump says.


And they apologized as soon as they found out, instead of insisting they were right and keeping on saying it.



There's integrity, legit efforts at integrity...and there's the opposite.
I have never used twitter,so this comment is based on news reports.

From what the reporters were saying,a teenager could tell the tweets weren't legit.

Yes,after being exposed,the democrats issued an apology.
But,they and especially the N.Y.Times should have done their due diligence,instead of jumping on what they thought was a "gotcha" moment.
It was dumb and they should have known better. But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it? There's a lot of misinformation out there. It wouldn't bother me if Trump, Obama, or anyone else occasionally fell for some of it as long as they admit when they are wrong and apologize for it. That shows that they have the ability to think things through and that they want to present themselves as truthful.

The problem with Trump is that he continually says things that are bold-faced lies and then doubles and triples down on them. When he came here, and spoke two blocks from my apartment, he claimed that Philadelphia was a mess and that the murder rate has been "terribly increasing." That's a lie. The Philadelphia I live in is far safer than it was 10 years ago or 20 years ago. If he had ventured out into the neighborhood he would see that it is thriving and growing and is a wonderful place to live. But he'd rather use his scare tactics and when someone points out to him that his falsehoods are indeed false he accuses that person of doing the lying. How can you guys not see this?
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
2/17/2017 9:51 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
A little more detail on this latest fake news story: https://tinyurl.com/h6mc5px
The phrase "fake news" either needs to die a quick death, or be used more carefully. As with false racism accusations, lumping mistakes by legitimate news sources in with "fake news" is incredibly damaging. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press, and this administration's war on the press, and constant accusations of "fake news" does damage to that.

The New York Times fell victim to a fake Twitter account, and then issued a retraction. The media has to be given leverage to make mistakes, so long as they're operating in good faith. Calling that "fake news" does an injustice the the severity of the battle being fought on that front. Fake news is actually fake news. It's reports made up to be shared widely on social media. It is, to be clear, propaganda. A misquote that's retracted is not that.

Edit: I should also say that I'm not trying to drag you back into this thread, though I've enjoyed your perspective and our back and forth. I just think that we need to start fixing things from the middle a bit, and that reasonable folks on both sides need to be diligent about not falling trap to damaging things like the war on the media.
Last Edited: 2/17/2017 12:51:14 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/17/2017 10:17 AM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
mail
DelBobcat
2/17/2017 12:27 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
The first article that OCF posted said:

"Cummings and Pelosi were quoting a fake account that also duped Newsmax and The New York Times."

But again, regarding motivations: There's a big difference between falling for a falsehood (Pelosi, Cummings, NYTimes, Newsmax) and purposely trying to mislead (Trump, Breitbart, Drudge)
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/17/2017 12:45 PM
True and clearly stated.

But you'll probably have to repeatedly explain it to the Trumpage.
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/17/2017 1:22 PM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
The first article that OCF posted said:

"Cummings and Pelosi were quoting a fake account that also duped Newsmax and The New York Times."

But again, regarding motivations: There's a big difference between falling for a falsehood (Pelosi, Cummings, NYTimes, Newsmax) and purposely trying to mislead (Trump, Breitbart, Drudge)
"Purposely trying to mislead".
Clinton (Bill and Hillary),N.Y.Times,MSNBC,Dan Rather(remember the fabricated documents about GW)),CNN to name a few.

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.
Last Edited: 2/17/2017 1:23:36 PM by rpbobcat
mail
OhioCatFan
2/17/2017 2:03 PM
BLSS, I agree that there needs to be a distinction between intentional falsehood (fake news) and being duped by a fake or lying source (poor reporting if talking about media). In the case of these congressional reps, one wonders why they were so quick to believe the parody as being a real tweet from General Flynn? I suspect it was because it fits a narrative they were trying to advance that there was additional dirt to be uncovered and that Flynn knows where the bones are buried. People on the other side certainly jump to conclusion also based on little, questionable, or fake information too. This is a bipartisan issue. So, again, we are in at least partial agreement.
mail
DelBobcat
2/17/2017 2:40 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
The first article that OCF posted said:

"Cummings and Pelosi were quoting a fake account that also duped Newsmax and The New York Times."

But again, regarding motivations: There's a big difference between falling for a falsehood (Pelosi, Cummings, NYTimes, Newsmax) and purposely trying to mislead (Trump, Breitbart, Drudge)
"Purposely trying to mislead".
Clinton (Bill and Hillary),N.Y.Times,MSNBC,Dan Rather(remember the fabricated documents about GW)),CNN to name a few.

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.
Oh come on RP. The NYT has won more Pulitzer Prizes than any other new organization in the world. Their news reporting is the MOST reliable of any source out there. They have a long and storied history of good journalism. Do you really think they are purposely misleading?
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/17/2017 3:01 PM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
The first article that OCF posted said:

"Cummings and Pelosi were quoting a fake account that also duped Newsmax and The New York Times."

But again, regarding motivations: There's a big difference between falling for a falsehood (Pelosi, Cummings, NYTimes, Newsmax) and purposely trying to mislead (Trump, Breitbart, Drudge)
"Purposely trying to mislead".
Clinton (Bill and Hillary),N.Y.Times,MSNBC,Dan Rather(remember the fabricated documents about GW)),CNN to name a few.

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.
Oh come on RP. The NYT has won more Pulitzer Prizes than any other new organization in the world. Their news reporting is the MOST reliable of any source out there. They have a long and storied history of good journalism. Do you really think they are purposely misleading?
I've been reading it since I was at O.U. in the 1970's.
Back then you could only get the Sunday edition and that was only at at 1 little store uptown.

At one time it was a reliable news source,with opinions limited to the Op-ed pages.

Under the current ownership of Carlos Slim the paper has degenerated into his sounding board.

So, in answer to your question,when it comes to certain issues, yes I believe they purposely mislead.

That being said,I do still enjoy reading their Arts and Leisure and metropolitan sections every Sunday.
Their Sports sections also have some really interesting articles.
Last Edited: 2/17/2017 3:06:46 PM by rpbobcat
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/17/2017 3:18 PM
rp--If you think that there's any equivalency between the NYTimes and Trump, then your powers of critical thinking are as minimal as possible.
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/17/2017 3:40 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
rp--If you think that there's any equivalency between the NYTimes and Trump, then your powers of critical thinking are as minimal as possible.
If you read my posts,I merely pointed out the fact that people and organizations on the left intentionally put out misleading information,just like the accusations made here against President Trump,Brietbart and Drudge.

If you didn't see that,the problem with critical thinking isn't with me.
mail
DelBobcat
2/17/2017 3:48 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
But why do either of you fail to mention that Newsmax, a conservative news outlet, also fell for it?
In my case,the "article" that OCF posted,is the only one I read on this.It only mentioned the N.Y.Times.
The first article that OCF posted said:

"Cummings and Pelosi were quoting a fake account that also duped Newsmax and The New York Times."

But again, regarding motivations: There's a big difference between falling for a falsehood (Pelosi, Cummings, NYTimes, Newsmax) and purposely trying to mislead (Trump, Breitbart, Drudge)
"Purposely trying to mislead".
Clinton (Bill and Hillary),N.Y.Times,MSNBC,Dan Rather(remember the fabricated documents about GW)),CNN to name a few.

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.
Oh come on RP. The NYT has won more Pulitzer Prizes than any other new organization in the world. Their news reporting is the MOST reliable of any source out there. They have a long and storied history of good journalism. Do you really think they are purposely misleading?
I've been reading it since I was at O.U. in the 1970's.
Back then you could only get the Sunday edition and that was only at at 1 little store uptown.

At one time it was a reliable news source,with opinions limited to the Op-ed pages.

Under the current ownership of Carlos Slim the paper has degenerated into his sounding board.

So, in answer to your question,when it comes to certain issues, yes I believe they purposely mislead.

That being said,I do still enjoy reading their Arts and Leisure and metropolitan sections every Sunday.
Their Sports sections also have some really interesting articles.
Slim owns a 17% stake in the company and has no control over the editorial or news content of the paper. Anybody saying otherwise is a conspiracy theorist without any actual info. I have friends who work for the Times. I assure you they take their journalistic responsibility very seriously and strive to provide quality, fact-based reporting.
mail
The Optimist
2/17/2017 7:58 PM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
I have friends who work for the Times. I assure you they take their journalistic responsibility very seriously and strive to provide quality, fact-based reporting.
DelBobcats wins the debate bc he has sources.

Sources=MSM "fact-based reporting"
mail
RSBobcat
2/18/2017 12:45 AM
More protest coming. Source is Russian funded RT - so must be true...

https://www.rt.com/usa/377776-day-of-strikes-feb /
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/18/2017 3:33 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
rp--If you think that there's any equivalency between the NYTimes and Trump, then your powers of critical thinking are as minimal as possible.
If you read my posts,I merely pointed out the fact that people and organizations on the left intentionally put out misleading information,just like the accusations made here against President Trump,Brietbart and Drudge.

If you didn't see that,the problem with critical thinking isn't with me.
Yes, it is. Compare the intent and the effort (or lack thereof) in regard to stating the truth. The respect for the truth.

If you're asserting that the media are of the same ilk as the Trump side, please see an optical professional.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/18/2017 2:55 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-republicans-hate-obamacare...
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
2/20/2017 12:52 PM
I think we all enjoyed "what happened last night in Sweden."
Showing Messages: 126 - 150 of 170
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)