Social CNN, NBC, Bloomberg, etc Change Headline Critical of Dems all at Once

Well, they are all on the same payroll.
 
HockeyBjj said:
Tweet dead. Who was it and what did it say?
Click to expand...
I think it was this one.
EVakTLLWoAQT4x8.jpg
 
Hadron90 said:
I think it was this one.
EVakTLLWoAQT4x8.jpg
Click to expand...

Thats amazing. Thank you. I would have hated to miss that.

No sexual misconduct other than ya know, uncomfortable touching of other women
 
i ddidnt pay that close to it but from what I understand, but Dems blocked the bill (which is expected) and then added provisions to it (also expected) and now the GOP are trying to add their provisions, etc.

Some sites like to update articles, while others just post a new one. Its no big deal nor a conspiracy
 
blaseblah said:
It looks bad to have one headline and then ninja edit the title.
Click to expand...
If you're a nutjob partisan hack, sure.
Normal people who actual read journalistic content are pretty normalized to updates and corrections; and the fact they're clearly noted makes this whole conspiracy theory laughable.
 
HockeyBjj said:
Thats amazing. Thank you. I would have hated to miss that.

No sexual misconduct other than ya know, uncomfortable touching of other women
Click to expand...
They pulled it down, hoping you would miss it.
 
Queen B said:
i ddidnt pay that close to it but from what I understand, but Dems blocked the bill (which is expected) and then added provisions to it (also expected) and now the GOP are trying to add their provisions, etc.

Some sites like to update articles, while others just post a new one. Its no big deal nor a conspiracy
Click to expand...

True. Most will update articles. Not sure about changing entire headlines though
 
MVelsor said:
It has a massive readership following. I've known about it for quite a while because it's headquartered here (what's up with that? lol).

Newsweek reported that the site has grown from receiving 1,000 page views a day in 2009 to more than 1 million during 2016. The New York Times reported in 2019 that the site has more than 36 million readers and followers on Facebook.

In a story on how fake news spreads on social media, The Intercept reported that: "Thanks to views sourced largely to referrals from Facebook, Brown's websites now outrank web traffic going to news outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, CBS and NPR, according to data compiled by Alexa".
Click to expand...

It’s hilarious how this post that accurately states that this blog gets over a million views per day gets completely ignored, but the inaccurate post saying that they only have 15 readers was so popular.

Make something up, everybody loves it. Tell the truth, crickets. That is this forum in a nutshell sometimes, they want memes, not facts.
 
Hadron90 said:
I think it was this one.
EVakTLLWoAQT4x8.jpg
Click to expand...

HockeyBjj said:
Thats amazing. Thank you. I would have hated to miss that.

No sexual misconduct other than ya know, uncomfortable touching of other women
Click to expand...

Sketch said:
Wow. That is really something. You would think it’s from an Onion article.
Click to expand...

Confucamus said:
Unbelievable. What a joke.
Click to expand...


It’s not just a Tweet, the tweets are taken directly from the full version of the article.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html
No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.
Click to expand...

They changed the wording of the last sentence, removing the references to kissing and hugging. Probably because they worried that people would think they were saying that part is not so bad. They likely deleted the tweet because it no longer aligned with the article.
 
nac386 said:
It’s not just a Tweet, the tweets are taken directly from the full version of the article.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html


They changed the wording of the last sentence, removing the references to kissing, and hugging. Probably because they worried that people would think they were saying that part is not so bad. They likely deleted the tweet because it no longer aligned with the article.
Click to expand...

No, they removed that part because it did indeed sound bad, and sounded bad for Biden.

If they were worried about people thinking they felt inappropriate kissing , touching, and hugging was not so bad, would they not have instead changed to wording so that they actually condemned those inappropriate things from Biden (while saying they don’t amount to sexual assault) rather than just deleting and hiding them?
 
HockeyBjj said:
No, they removed that part because it did indeed sound bad, and sounded bad for Biden.

If they were worried about people thinking they felt inappropriate kissing , touching, and hugging was not so bad, would they not have instead changed to wording so that they actually condemned those inappropriate things from Biden (while saying they don’t amount to sexual assault) rather than just deleting and hiding them?
Click to expand...

We’re essentially saying the same thing, but I don't think the Newspaper is supposed to say, "Oh and we condemn it," after saying somebody was accused of sexual misconduct. Of course sexual misconduct is condemned.

The article clearly makes the previous misconduct known. The line you're referring to came well after they already made clear that 7 other women accused him of making them uncomfortable.
Last year, Ms. Reade and seven other women came forward to accuse Mr. Biden of kissing, hugging or touching them in ways that made them feel uncomfortable. Ms. Reade told The Times then that Mr. Biden had publicly stroked her neck, wrapped his fingers in her hair and touched her in ways that made her uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

So if you think they took that line out to make Biden look better, it would be a pretty strange way to go about it after already laying out all the other accusations with the same exact wording earlier in the article.
 
nac386 said:
It’s hilarious how this post that accurately states that this blog gets over a million views per day gets completely ignored, but the inaccurate post saying that they only have 15 readers was so popular.

Make something up, everybody loves it. Tell the truth, crickets. That is this forum in a nutshell sometimes, they want memes, not facts.
Click to expand...

You gotta stop counting/judging likes. Lol

And while it may get alot of views it's not surprising that many have not heard of it. I never have. So not knowing it gets alot of views is not making things up. This sort of reminds me when you said you'd never heard of Boomer Remover yet a quick Google search showed Millennials were using it online.

You gotta stop judging every little thing people do.
 
Last edited:
SBJJ said:
You gotta stop counting/judging likes. Lol
Click to expand...

I actually think it's pretty interesting sometimes. @Madmick says a blog has like 15 views, and therefore should not be judged the way we judge other periodicals. That post was very popular, people loved to be told something like that because it aligned with what they wanted to believe. @MVelsor accurately corrects him by saying it's more like 36 million readers, and over a million views per day. That post was entirely ignored, because it did not align with what they wanted to believe. That post, like mine, dispelled a false narrative. But the narrative is popular, almost a way of life to some people, and they almost need to go on believing certain things. When they get a bit of reality, they go back to the meme-world where things are exactly how they want them to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,986
Messages
55,459,521
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top