Opinion Do you actually think that CNN is "fake news"?

[oldshadow]

No not fake but agenda driven yes.

Their agenda is anti anything that isn’t left and a democrat.

So they “slant” the news to that.

The same for Fox News to the right.

CCN is not as bad as some I’ll give them that.

 

[bobgeese]

No not fake but agenda driven yes.

Their agenda is anti anything that isn’t left and a democrat.

So they “slant” the news to that.

The same for Fox News to the right.

CCN is not as bad as some I’ll give them that.

Two slight disagreements.

1 - fox does, at least kinda admit their bias. CNN pretends to be neutral.

2 - a certain kind of democrat. Their editing of the Bernie pic, should put to bed any assertion that they aren’t actively against him.

 

[Amerikuracana]

It's really close.

 

[ferrisjso]

No not fake but agenda driven yes.

Their agenda is anti anything that isn’t left and a democrat.

So they “slant” the news to that.

The same for Fox News to the right.

CCN is not as bad as some I’ll give them that.

Their agenda is anti left. Ask anyone on the left.

 

[spin]

i dont trust CNN on anything involving politicians or race. i have to research to verify.

Fox news i dont trust on anything.

 

[oldshadow]

Their agenda is anti left. Ask anyone on the left.

Depends on which left you ask.

They certainly are pro democrat and anti republican.

 

[ferrisjso]

Depends on which left you ask.

They certainly are pro democrat and anti republican.

But party identity's don't actually mean anything. It's just political infrastructure, before the last 30, 40 years political partys were entirely pan ideological meaning you identified as Dem or Repub regardless of your actual political views then fought in the primary's for candidates who shared your views. This is why conventions used to be such shitshows cause conservatives and liberals openly shared both parties, now it's everyone left of a certain point is in one party, everyone right of a certain point is in another. The words Democrat and Republican have no inherent meaning whatsoever. It's possible in 50 years all the lefties on this forum will be Repubs and all the right wingers will be Democrat. We don't know.

Right now all Republicans are on the right. Some Democrats are on the right. Country's political parties were shifted rightwing in the 1980s because the boomers were an unusually economically conservative generation.

This is part of why I find the third party movement to be so dumb, literally creating more work/trying to do something nearly impossible just so you can have a party name you feel better about.

 

[IGIT]

Is this the same CNN that sold the Iraq and Afghanistan wars right alongside MSNBC, fox news, CBS, ABC and NBC?

hio SIRGAY HARITONOBI, good to see you,

i don't think its quite fair to lump MSNBC in there.

MSNBC hosts Chris Matthews, Bill Press, Phil Donahue, Pat Buchanan and Jessie Ventura all were very critical of the Bush administration's pretext for invading Iraq.

and then the US invaded Iraq, and anyone who spoke out against the war "hated America" or "didn't support our troops". anyone who didn't tow the line was routinely flayed on FoxNews, day and night...and FoxNews surged in the cable ratings (meaning, they made lots and lots of $$$).

and then what did MSNBC do after President W. Bush committed US lives to a war of choice? it fired Donahue. it fired Press. it fired Buchanan. it fired Ventura. oh, and they hired Iraq war cheerleaders, Chuck Scarborough and Michael Savage.
when America is at war in the shadow of 9-11, MSNBC quickly learned that America didn't want to too much commentary that is negative or critical about the war. it didn't sell, though they tried selling it. Americans weren't having it.

*muses*

then again, they also hired Keith Olbermann, who took a flamethrower to the Bush administration on a daily basis.

- IGIT

 

[Jack V Savage]

Depends on which left you ask.

They certainly are pro democrat and anti republican.

That's ridiculous. How do you explain their decision to air live, unedited footage of Trump campaign rallies or to replace their conservative commentators with more Trump-friendly ones (including hiring Lewandowski while he had a standing non-disparagement agreement with Trump)?

 

[oldshadow]

That's ridiculous. How do you explain their decision to air live, unedited footage of Trump campaign rallies or to replace their conservative commentators with more Trump-friendly ones (including hiring Lewandowski while he had a standing non-disparagement agreement with Trump)?

If you look at how and why of their coverage there is no mistake about it.

Of course you are not going to admit it. I seem to remember you saying CCN was actually on the side of the right.

 

[Jack V Savage]

it didn't sell, though they tried selling it. Americans weren't having it.

This is a big part of the issue. If you just imagine a perfectly accurate, perfectly unbiased news source, what percentage of the people who read or watch it regularly would *think* that it's perfectly accurate or perfectly unbiased? Most of the right and the far left would think that it's biased against them.

 

[SBJJ]

"Smoking Gun"
WMDs
We must attack now, before it's too late
fighting for their freedom
sanctions aren't working
Saddam isn't complying with UN inspections, he violated so many agreemnents with the UN (even though he granted them full access leading up to the war)

This was a war that didn't need to be fought or waged...and the American people were led to believe that it was absolutely necessary.

What some posters don't understand is that the media is NOT supposed to be the mouthpiece for the MIC and Intelligence agencies. They are supposed to investigate or at least be suspect of what they are fed from these sleazy institutions.

CNN is a mouthpiece for our intelligence agencies. They are nothing but propaganda. Look at them hiring McCabe. Look at their relationships with these agencies

They do not ever question the narrative these agencies give them. And that is a shame because that is their job

They truly are the enemy of the people in many ways

 

[Jack V Savage]

If you look at how and why of their coverage there is no mistake about it.

Of course you are not going to admit it. I seem to remember you saying CCN was actually on the side of the right.

I didn't ask for you to emphasize the certainty you have in your position or attack me personally. Here's the question again:

How do you explain their decision to air live, unedited footage of Trump campaign rallies or to replace their conservative commentators with more Trump-friendly ones (including hiring Lewandowski while he had a standing non-disparagement agreement with Trump)?

I could also ask how you explain their decision to treat Clinton using a private email address as the most important issue in the 2016 presidential election and be completely unconcerned with far more risky security practices in the Trump administration.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

What some posters don't understand is that the media is NOT supposed to be the mouthpiece for the MIC and Intelligence agencies. They are supposed to investigate or at least be suspect of what they are fed from these sleazy institutions.

CNN is a mouthpiece for our intelligence agencies. They are nothing but propaganda. Look at them hiring McCabe. Look at their relationships with these agencies

They do not ever question the narrative these agencies give them. And that is a shame because that is their job

They truly are the enemy of the people in many ways

Immortal Technique said it best.

they are the "4th Branch of the Government"

 

[uppercutbus]

If you look at how and why of their coverage there is no mistake about it.

Of course you are not going to admit it. I seem to remember you saying CCN was actually on the side of the right.

War Room leftists have defended CNN as the epitome of unbiased and professional news during this year (1, 2 ). Of course they have to double down when their beloved news station is attacked, no going back #InTooDeep

 

[IGIT]

This is a big part of the issue. If you just imagine a perfectly accurate, perfectly unbiased news source, what percentage of the people who read or watch it regularly would *think* that it's perfectly accurate or perfectly unbiased? Most of the right and the far left would think that it's biased against them.

hiya JVS,

and that's why NPR never gets mentioned in any of these peculiar threads.

they just aren't nutty enough. they investigate, they report, and they aren't seated at glass tables that allow you to look up their skirts.

its depressing to me, as usual, how many folks get their news from television. it absolutely just bums me out.

- IGIT

 

[grimballer]

Of course it’s fake news. They have an agenda against trump n it’s pretty obvious

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

hio SIRGAY HARITONOBI, good to see you,

i don't think its quite fair to lump MSNBC in there.

MSNBC hosts Chris Matthews, Bill Press, Phil Donahue, Pat Buchanan and Jessie Ventura all were very critical of the Bush administration's pretext for invading Iraq.

and then the US invaded Iraq, and anyone who spoke out against the war "hated America" or "didn't support our troops". anyone who didn't tow the line was routinely flayed on FoxNews, day and night...and FoxNews surged in the cable ratings (meaning, they made lots and lots of $$$).

and then what did MSNBC do after President W. Bush committed US lives to a war of choice? it fired Donahue. it fired Press. it fired Buchanan. it fired Ventura. oh, and they hired Iraq war cheerleaders, Chuck Scarborough and Michael Savage.
when America is at war in the shadow of 9-11, MSNBC quickly learned that America didn't want to too much commentary that is negative or critical about the war. it didn't sell, though they tried selling it. Americans weren't having it.

*muses*

then again, they also hired Keith Olbermann, who took a flamethrower to the Bush administration on a daily basis.

- IGIT

Again, ask yourself , or research why MSNBC shit canned Jesse Ventura and Phil Donahue.

 

[oldshadow]

I didn't ask for you to emphasize the certainty you have in your position or attack me personally. Here's the question again:

How do you explain their decision to air live, unedited footage of Trump campaign rallies or to replace their conservative commentators with more Trump-friendly ones (including hiring Lewandowski while he had a standing non-disparagement agreement with Trump)?

I could also ask how you explain their decision to treat Clinton using a private email address as the most important issue in the 2016 presidential election and be completely unconcerned with far more risky security practices in the Trump administration.

I’m not even going to try with you on this because this has been around and around with you.

No matter what you are going to stick to this. Page after page and post after post in many other threads. You believe what you want and that is that.

 

[Mr Holmes]

CNN is probably the worst of the big networks. They're pure tabloid trash.