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

[glenwo2]

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

No sexual misconduct other than ya know, uncomfortable touching of other women

God Bless @Hadron90 for putting that up. lol

 

[SBJJ]

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.

I'm pretty sure he also did not know who they were. He just posted their Wiki info. There are plenty of things on the internet that get loads of views. Does not mean they are considered MEDIA. Madmick did not MAKE SOMETHING UP. He just did not realize a name MOST of us never heard of got so many views. And you knew that I'm sure

Where did you go when the Covington kids are evil narrative was destroyed. Oh yea, you soldiered on. I mean shit dude, it's the height of hypocrisy for you to judge others for falling for Bullshit or fake narratives. You are the King of the castle when it comes to that.

 

[nac386]

I'm pretty sure he also did not know who they were. He just posted their Wiki info. There are plenty of things on the internet that get loads of views. Does not mean they are considered MEDIA. Madmick did not MAKE SOMETHING UP. He just did not realize a name MOST of us never heard of got so many views. And you knew that I'm sure

Where did you go when the Covington kids are evil narrative was destroyed. Oh yea, you soldiered on. I mean shit dude, it's the height of hypocrisy for you to judge others for falling for Bullshit or fake narratives. You are the King of the castle when it comes to that.

I said that Madmick said something inaccurate, and people loved it because it aligned with what they wanted to believe. That inaccuracy was corrected, and everybody ignored it because it was no longer what people wanted to believe. I was very clear. He did not need to attempt to make that up, or lie intentionally, and I never claimed that he did. I simply said he was wrong, and corrected.

No matter how many deflections you attempt here, the fact is that MVeslor and myself both corrected an inaccurate post and people skipped right over it because it didn't align with what they really wanted to believe.

 

[nac386]

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.

You are like a machine that only posts half-truths and misinformation.

First of all, I already said that people have not heard of the sites they are visiting or getting information from two pages ago:

Yeah, these blogish right wing sites are a major source for a lot of people. Plus, a lot of people don’t even know that the information they are consuming began on one of those sites because they consume it through memes and Tweets. I bet half of the people who frequent the sites through Facebook links don’t even know what webpage they are reading, they are just thrilled to read confirmation of their feelings.

Second, saying that I've never heard someone say "Boomer Remover" means exactly that. I have never heard anyone say Boomer Remover.

You don't have to google something first in order to say you've never heard of it. That doesn't even make sense.

 

[SBJJ]

I said that Madmick said something inaccurate, and people loved it because it aligned with what they wanted to believe. That inaccuracy was corrected, and everybody ignored it because it was no longer what people wanted to believe. I was very clear. He did not need to attempt to make that up, or lie intentionally, and I never claimed that he did. I simply said he was wrong, and corrected.

No matter how many deflections you attempt here, the fact is that MVeslor and myself both corrected an inaccurate post and people skipped right over it because it didn't align with what they really wanted to believe.

See your later post where you said....make something up

And pointing out your flaming hypocrisy of judging people on something you do more than just about any other poster is not deflecting. Its pointing out you should be the last person to judge others about it.

The Covington thread is just one of your more famous examples

 

[SBJJ]

You are like a machine that only posts half-truths and misinformation.

First of all, I already said that people have not heard of the sites they are visiting or getting information from two pages ago:



Second, saying that I've never heard someone say "Boomer Remover" means exactly that. I have never heard anyone say Boomer Remover.

You don't have to google something first in order to say you've never heard of it. That doesn't even make sense.

Yep. This is how it usually goes with you. Whenever you get called out on your blatant hypocrisy you lash out with the lying accusations.

You are like a B movie seen over and over. Can predict each next scene

 

[MVelsor]

I'm pretty sure he also did not know who they were.

I did, but mostly only because it's based in Phoenix and Floyd Brown is a rather well known political activist / media manipulator who has been around for decades. It's actually his son Patrick that runs the website though.

 

[nac386]

Yep. This is how it usually goes with you. Whenever you get called out on your blatant hypocrisy you lash out with the lying accusations.

You are like a B movie seen over and over. Can predict each next scene

That post did not call me out at all, you are not even making sense now. You made two ridiculous statements, and I gave a concise response to each.

Both were nonsensical, and I explained exactly why. First, you did not realize I had already made the point you were trying to make. Then you went back to the Boomer Remover thing, that has already been explained to you twice now, but apparently is beyond your grasp.

Of course you are not acknowledging that, because like I said, you only post half-truths and misinformation. You are a black hole to try to communicate with. When I go back and forth with you, it's almost disorienting.

 

[Mr Holmes]

I did, but mostly only because it's based in Phoenix and Floyd Brown is a rather well known political activist / media manipulator who has been around for decades. It's actually his son Patrick that runs the website though.

I'll have to admit I never heard of them either (even though it my thread). I saw this story while flipping thru my reddit feed and googled it to find a source that had all the screen grabs.

 

[SBJJ]

I did, but mostly only because it's based in Phoenix and Floyd Brown is a rather well known political activist / media manipulator who has been around for decades. It's actually his son Patrick that runs the website though.

So otherwise, you'd have been in the dark like just about everyone on this site besides NAC. Shit, he probably had no clue either

 

[HockeyBjj]

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.


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.

Tweets are a lot more impactful due to A) most people nowadays just scrolling through headlines and B) the times behind a paywall to actually read the content of their article

So yes, deleting the tweet feels like a way to get what they saw as an overly negative tweet against Biden out of the light yet still claim to be unbiased in their reporting.

 

[nac386]

Tweets are a lot more impactful due to A) most people nowadays just scrolling through headlines and B) the times behind a paywall to actually read the content of their article

So yes, deleting the tweet feels like a way to get what they saw as an overly negative tweet against Biden out of the light yet still claim to be unbiased in their reporting.

I just can't relate to that at all. People consume the NYT mostly through Tweets? I'm not saying it's not true, because I have no idea. But it sounds ridiculous to me. Why would you look at a Tweet and not read the article? I don't even have Twitter so this is foreign to me.

The article clearly states all the times he's been accused. I read the article, and did not even look at the Tweets that were posted other than to find the link.

 

[SBJJ]

That post did not call me out at all, you are not even making sense now. You made two ridiculous statements, and I gave a concise response to each.

Both were nonsensical, and I explained exactly why. First, you did not realize I had already made the point you were trying to make. Then you went back to the Boomer Remover thing, that has already been explained to you twice now, but apparently is beyond your grasp.

Of course you are not acknowledging that, because like I said, you only post half-truths and misinformation. You are a black hole to try to communicate with.

Look at this fucking mumbo jumbo of a post.

You're a liar! Fuck off hypocrite. Get back to judging likes, you petty boy

 

[superpunch]

Ever notice how talking heads on news networks tend to word things almost the same way? It's because the political parties have teams that decide what to say and how to phrase different issues, then they literally just e-mail it to everyone: senators, congressmen, local politicians, journalists, etc.

So what obviously happened is the Democratic party sent out one of those e-mails, and these news networks have people working for them that got the memo, and updated accordingly.

Notice the news networks didn't just change the headlines; they even worded the headlines the same. If you saw 2 college students doing that, you'd say one plagiarized/ copied the other; here, they copied the Democratic party's memo.

 

[nac386]

You're a liar! Fuck off hypocrite. Get back to judging likes, you petty boy

Okay great, have a nice night. Happy Easter.

 

[Mr Holmes]

Ever notice how talking heads on news networks tend to word things almost the same way? It's because the political parties have teams that decide what to say and how to phrase different issues, then they literally just e-mail it to everyone: senators, congressmen, local politicians, journalists, etc.

So what obviously happened is the Democratic party sent out one of those e-mails, and these news networks have people working for them that got the memo, and updated accordingly.

Notice the news networks didn't just change the headlines; they even worded the headlines the same. If you saw 2 college students doing that, you'd say one plagiarized/ copied the other; here, they copied the Democratic party's memo.

Exactly my thoughts too. Not only did every single one of them change around the same time, but they all have the same wording.

 

[superpunch]

Exactly my thoughts too. Not only did every single one of them change around the same time, but they all have the same wording.

If you ever listen to senators do interviews, you'll notice they word things the same way journalists/ talking heads are, and have the same supporting arguments. That's why. They all get the same memos from political parties and just parrot them.

 

[Sketch]

This Nac guy is working 24/7 around the clock to sweep this under the rug.

 

[hillelslovak87]

None of you guys seem to have any experience or knowledge of how newsmedia works, yet you're all throwing out these confident narratives about the reasoning of these outlets that conveniently fit in with your preconceived notions about the newsmedia.

 

[HockeyBjj]

I just can't relate to that at all. People consume the NYT mostly through Tweets? I'm not saying it's not true, because I have no idea. But it sounds ridiculous to me. Why would you look at a Tweet and not read the article? I don't even have Twitter so this is foreign to me.

The article clearly states all the times he's been accused. I read the article, and did not even look at the Tweets that were posted other than to find the link.

The number of times there’s comments about something from the headline while the article clears it up really show how many do do just that with only reading tweet or fb headline and not clicking on to load the full article and reading it.

We disagree here but you’re definitely an above average informed voter. Those at or below that line, especially younger people, are the ones who just scroll through social media and never actually digest what they’re looking at from the tweet links.

Here’s a study that 60% share a link based off the headline without even reading the article. That’s not just those who see the headline and get that information without reading it through to get more. That’s people who think something is important enough they want others to see it, and don’t even read it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...g-it-according-to-a-new-and-depressing-study/

This article itself is one worth the time to read. Short, and talks about how that re-share of tweet without taking time to read is one of the biggest factors in keeping something circulating and not fading from public radar.

So hence me thinking them deleting the negative tweet while leaving the positive ones when the article is clearly a bit mixed is likely some intentional public misleading.