The Pocket Guide to Bullshit Prevention

[william]

Given our unique status it's not so far fetched to imagine our own journalism arm of DWS. We have an eclectic assortment of analysts who can read between the lines and report information objectively.

The bar is set pretty low out there gang. We could do it

The bar is set pretty low out there gang.

 

[RiffRaff]

Binary logic gets a bad wrap.
As I move thru my day and I become tired or thirsty. I, me personally, prefer a logic system that enables me to determine easily with out to much internal debate if this or that spot would be a more comfortable place to set and rest.
Or more consequential to determine with out to much hesitancy or self doubt would this be a good place to get a clean drink of water.

“Choosing” is always a binary selection of either / or.
Is this benifitial to me?
Does it matter if I even have an opinion?
What will happen if I do nothing?
Or should I get involved and beat the shit out of that asshat?

It a matter of informed perspective and historical understanding.
A journalist must and will always enter a event with a bias. Be it cultural, historic, education.
But they must dig and look for information as yet not widely reported that can shed new light on a incident.

A historian who sifts through myriad of old text and letters and makes a novel discovery of different events that did infact impact each other. But till then no one had ever discovered that is a “journalist”. Their reporting a as yet unknown correlation that impacted events.

Even a war correspondent reporting on a battle does so with a predisposed set of opinions likely similar to their audience. If they didn’t then they would not have the historic and cultural concepts to successfully communicate what they are seeing to their consumer.

So being a journalist is not a scientific title or badge one is bequeathed and shoved off into the world and told go forth do good journalism.

If that was the case “webcams”. Would be the ultimate journalist.

Being a journalist is earned respect and trust that they are faithfully communicating a complex and chaotic situation in a manner I likely would agree with if I were there with them.
Well that’s a pretty damn small list and probably not one we would agreed upon amongst us.

So for me a journalist can absolutely interject their opinions into the reporting. I expect them to to at least some degree because it would not be human to do otherwise.

As far as tucker Carlson he’s not a journalist. But I think his type of platform can be valuable because he ask questions and challenges the accepted norm. Since when I’m america do challenging authority or dogma become a bad thing.
I don’t always agree with him but he critical to honest debate.

We can not honestly maintain a list of these four and no more are the only acceptable news sources. Because we’ve seen time and again they can be fallible.
You kinda have to “work”at the news consumption yourself.

Challenging authority or dogma is only critical if you do so with everyone, no exceptions. Challenging ONLY left-wing authority or dogma is not critical; it's championing right-wing authority and dogma while criticizing left-wing authority and dogma. That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP.

 

[Six]

Challenging authority or dogma is only critical if you do so with everyone, no exceptions. Challenging ONLY left-wing authority or dogma is not critical; it's championing right-wing authority and dogma while criticizing left-wing authority and dogma. That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP.

I miss Neil Boortz

 

[Publius]

Challenging authority or dogma is only critical if you do so with everyone, no exceptions. Challenging ONLY left-wing authority or dogma is not critical; it's championing right-wing authority and dogma while criticizing left-wing authority and dogma. That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP.

That is very well true, but that does not make his critiques of the democrats incorrect. It would just make him inconsistent. Being a mouth peace does not mean he wrong on everything.

 

[Publius]

a one sided mouthpiece for the GOP?

Fox News attack dog Tucker Carlson turns on Trump: 'I don't think he's capable'

The Fox News commentator delivered a verdict on the Trump administration’s first two years in an interview with Die Weltwoche – and he’s not pleased

www.theguardian.com

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/04/media/fox-news-iran-soleimani/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/05/media/tucker-carlson-op-ed-ukraine-trump-impeachment/index.html

Tucker Carlson, for All His Faults, Gets What Trump Doesn’t About Coronavirus (Column)

I never thought I’d say this out loud, let alone write it, but I actually found a modicum of respect for Tucker Carlson Monday night when on his primetime program he broke ranks with colleagues at …

variety.com

Fox News' Tucker Carlson Turns On Trump: 'I Don't Think He's Capable'

"I don’t think he’s capable of sustained focus. I don’t think he understands the system," Carlson said in an interview with a Swiss magazine.

www.huffpost.com

 

[RiffRaff]

That is very well true, but that does not make his critiques of the democrats incorrect. It would just make him inconsistent. Being a mouth peace does not mean he wrong on everything.

Hell, even the National Enquirer gets something right occasionally. Doesn't mean I'm going to start citing them as a reliable source.

Tucker's inconsistency makes his opinions on anything untrustworthy, whether he's right or not. Same goes for regular people on the street. If all they're doing is criticizing one side while simultaneously making excuses for the other side, then I ignore anything they have to say. It means they have been successfully brainwashed and they are now nothing more than parrots repeating what they hear without understanding what they're saying.

Tucker Carlson has only recently changed his tune on Mr. Trump. That does not legitimize him at all. It just makes me wonder who other than Trump is pulling his strings now.

 

[Publius]

Hell, even the National Enquirer gets something right occasionally. Doesn't mean I'm going to start citing them as a reliable source.

Tucker's inconsistency makes his opinions on anything untrustworthy, whether he's right or not. Same goes for regular people on the street. If all they're doing is criticizing one side while simultaneously making excuses for the other side, then I ignore anything they have to say. It means they have been successfully brainwashed and they are now nothing more than parrots repeating what they hear without understanding what they're saying.

Tucker Carlson has only recently changed his tune on Mr. Trump. That does not legitimize him at all. It just makes me wonder who other than Trump is pulling his strings now.

So do we discount everything he proposes offhand because he’s “untrustworthy” or do we weigh the individual points he raises on the merits.
I believe he is almost completely wrong on Ukraine. But that does not mean he can not make valid observations on other issues.
His criticisms of trump go at least as far back as 2018 in the middle of his term, That is not recent.

Is the litmus test for journalist or commentators so fixed in stone that once on the “list” they can never have a worthy observation again.
When we do that we walk ourselves into dead end canyons of closed thought with ever narrowing sources of information.

This is a guy who’s in the bag for trump?

Tucker Carlson's scorn for Trump revealed in defamation lawsuit filings

The defamation lawsuit against Fox News by a voting machine company is revealing some bluntly negative behind-the-scenes Fox attitudes toward Donald Trump.

www.pbs.org

Carlson is mostly a silver spoon libertarian who hates big government and foreign intervention. He doesn’t question what happened Jan 6 because he’s carrying water for trump, I think he just believes those people stetting in jail on misdemeanor charges with no bail are getting fucked over and used as pawns.
Given acrimonious national politics that one very possible conclusion to have.

 

[william]

"That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP."

"Tucker's inconsistency makes his opinions on anything untrustworthy, whether he's right or not."

"Tucker Carlson has only recently changed his tune on Mr. Trump. That does not legitimize him at all."

Why are you critiquing JUST Tucker Carlson RiffRaff when I can show quotes from CNN, ABC. NBC, CBS and MSNBC that are proven lies! Hell, the current president lies just about every time he speaks!


Moderator Edit: Image removed

 

[william]

Challenging authority or dogma is only critical if you do so with everyone, no exceptions. Challenging ONLY left-wing authority or dogma is not critical; it's championing right-wing authority and dogma while criticizing left-wing authority and dogma. That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP.

Would you like me to quote from Tucker where he has criticized the GOP? People like Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Mit Romney and the like?

 

[Six]

Would you like me to quote from Tucker where he has criticized the GOP? People like Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Mit Romney and the like?

Dude, I'm a lifer republican but I'm seriously tired of pundits, op-ed personalities and others who have gotten filthy rich (left and right) from being divisive and inciteful. From Tucker to Alan colmes, to O'Reily to Russel Brand to Sean hanity etc.

 

[Publius]

Dude, I'm a lifer republican but I'm seriously tired of pundits, op-ed personalities and others who have gotten filthy rich (left and right) from being divisive and inciteful. From Tucker to Alan colmes, to O'Reily to Russel Brand to Sean hanity etc.

This is as it has always been. You don’t think Cronkite or Chancelor or Rather got wealthy?
What about Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Rachel Maddow is an MSNBC news anchor who has a net worth of $50 million. Rachel Maddow began her career in radio, co-hosting "The Dave in the Morning Show" in Massachusetts before

www.celebritynetworth.com

They all make a lot of money it’s a high profile job.
So fine hate the system but don’t fall for this notion it’s somehow just a right wing gig. There might be more of them because More people actually watch them.

Dan Rather Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Dan Rather is a journalist and former national news anchor known for his landmark reporting over the span of five decades. Dan Rather has a net worth of $70 million.

www.celebritynetworth.com

Wolf Blitzer Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Wolf Blitzer is a German-American journalist and television news anchor who has a net worth of $25 million dollars. Blitzer has been a reporter for CNN since 1990.

www.celebritynetworth.com

 

[Six]

This is as it has always been. You don’t think Cronkite or Chancelor or Rather got wealthy?
What about Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Rachel Maddow is an MSNBC news anchor who has a net worth of $50 million. Rachel Maddow began her career in radio, co-hosting "The Dave in the Morning Show" in Massachusetts before

www.celebritynetworth.com

They all make a lot of money it’s a high profile job.
So fine hate the system but don’t fall for this notion it’s somehow just a right wing gig. There might be more of them because More people actually watch them.

Dan Rather Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Dan Rather is a journalist and former national news anchor known for his landmark reporting over the span of five decades. Dan Rather has a net worth of $70 million.

www.celebritynetworth.com

Wolf Blitzer Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth

Wolf Blitzer is a German-American journalist and television news anchor who has a net worth of $25 million dollars. Blitzer has been a reporter for CNN since 1990.

www.celebritynetworth.com

Alan colmes and Russel brand are lefties. Well..... Colmes was, God rest his soul

 

[Yingyang]

Well as to the title it surely isn't hard. Stop trust in Washington and mainstream media.

 

[Publius]

Well as to the title it surely isn't hard. Stop trust in Washington and mainstream media.

Just use Reagan’s sage advice trust but verify. Assume it might be true but verify.
And sometimes even if it’s not explicitly true. If it is in your own perceived best interest then let it go.
The world is not a court room where absolute truth must be ascertained and acted upon. The world/life is a competition, a struggle. So we all make judgment calls individually and nationally according to our self interest.

The last thing I wanted to see is the US get into was another war. But I personally made a judgment call on the significance and importance of supporting Ukraine.
I have no fear of us not being able to financially and militarily seeing it through to the end with Ukraine.

But in the back of my mind I fear the lack of political will to see it thru.
That is my single greatest fear regarding Ukraine. Has been since the beginning.

 

[Yingyang]

Just use Reagan’s sage advice trust but verify. Assume it might be true but verify.
And sometimes even if it’s not explicitly true. If it is in your own perceived best interest then let it go.
The world is not a court room where absolute truth must be ascertained and acted upon. The world/life is a competition, a struggle. So we all make judgment calls individually and nationally according to our self interest.

The last thing I wanted to see is the US get into was another war. But I personally made a judgment call on the significance and importance of supporting Ukraine.
I have no fear of us not being able to financially and militarily seeing it through to the end with Ukraine.

But in the back of my mind I fear the lack of political will to see it thru.
That is my single greatest fear regarding Ukraine. Has been since the beginning.

I agree and Reagan wasn't stupid either . Reagan,JFK and Trump.

 

[william]

Dude, I'm a lifer republican but I'm seriously tired of pundits, op-ed personalities and others who have gotten filthy rich (left and right) from being divisive and inciteful. From Tucker to Alan colmes, to O'Reily to Russel Brand to Sean hanity etc.

Good for you. Don't watch Fox News than. Watch CNN or MSNBC if you don't like any of the personalities on Fox. Maybe the lawsuit against Fox will take them down. Then you won't have to worry about it.

 

[Six]

Good for you. Don't watch Fox News than. Watch CNN or MSNBC if you don't like any of the personalities on Fox. Maybe the lawsuit against Fox will take them down. Then you won't have to worry about it.

Ok William....
Please reread the text you quoted from me. I'll repeat it now for clarity's sake; I'm sick of journalism being reduced to talking heads with an axe to grind. This includes CNN, MSNBC, Fox and even the BBC. It includes Left wing talking heads.... And right wing talking heads. Still a lifer R.

I mean you're a smart guy, you don't need someone to issue you your opinions

 

[RiffRaff]

"That makes Tucker Carlson a one-sided mouthpiece for the GOP."

"Tucker's inconsistency makes his opinions on anything untrustworthy, whether he's right or not."

"Tucker Carlson has only recently changed his tune on Mr. Trump. That does not legitimize him at all."

Why are you critiquing JUST Tucker Carlson RiffRaff when I can show quotes from CNN, ABC. NBC, CBS and MSNBC that are proven lies! Hell, the current president lies just about every time he speaks!


Moderator Edit: Image removed

Point #1: Nobody said anything one way or the other about the political bias of any of those sources; the topic was Tucker Carlson specifically.
Point #2: American mainstream media sucks for the most part when it comes to politics. Nobody tells the American people the truth anymore.
Point #3: Biden lies. Trump lies. Obama lied. George W. Bush lied. Clinton lied. Shall I continue, or do you get the idea yet?

People who assume *their guy* is always honest but the other guy is always lying have been deceived and brainwashed.
People who assume *their media* is always honest but the other media is always lying have been deceived and brainwashed.

I think it's rather disingenuous for you to accuse me of being guilty of the very thing I have been trying to convince people of for years.
STOP. LISTENING. TO. AMERICAN. MEDIA.

 

[Totality 🇺🇦 🇮🇱]

Good for you. Don't watch Fox News than. Watch CNN or MSNBC if you don't like any of the personalities on Fox. Maybe the lawsuit against Fox will take them down. Then you won't have to worry about it.

Did you even bother reading others posts? If you did you wouldn't be saying what you are saying to RiffRaff... he is saying the same things about left wing media networks...

 

[Totality 🇺🇦 🇮🇱]

Maybe the lawsuit against Fox will take them down.

The universe isn't that great or likes me enough to do it. Would be amazing if it happened though!