“The free press is the despot's enemy.”

[koriwhat]

yes its your choice to dodge a question or to answer it

and it's your choice to shut the up and mind your own god damn business.

[DisAsTerBot]

and it's your choice to shut the up and mind your own god damn business.

Bro you’re so angry these days. es and blunts, remember?

[spurraider21]

and it's your choice to shut the up and mind your own god damn business.

i didnt make that choice, obviously. this is a message board, which serves the exact opposite purpose of shutting up and minding ones own business

[Blake]

and it's your choice to shut the up and mind your own god damn business.

damn dude it's just a discussion

[koriwhat]

Bro you’re so angry these days. es and blunts, remember?

far from angry. my allergys suck right now and the weather is cold as but other than that i am quite comfortable and upbeat today.

i didnt make that choice, obviously. this is a message board, which serves the exact opposite purpose of shutting up and minding ones own business

whatever weirdo.

[koriwhat]

damn dude it's just a discussion

whatever blake

[Blake]

far from angry.

Whatever kw

[hater]

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

[koriwhat]

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

only state sponsored "news" is allowed. i mean just take a look at the gustapo of social networks shadow banning and hiding other "news" outlets on their platforms. what's good for the gander isn't good for those that don't subscribe.

[RandomGuy]

no that's not good and teeters on the edge of a dictatorship. now with all that's come out in the last year sit back for a minute and reflect on most things newsworthy. how much of it has been news and not just some fabricated bs because a bunch of en led s hate djt? yall prop these networks up as if they have a clean track record of which they don't and never have. they're bs liars and yall love lies.

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".

[koriwhat]

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".

i never claimed such a thing.

however, ing about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. reality, right?

[spurraider21]

i never claimed such a thing.

however, ing about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. reality, right?

might not be newsworthy. doesn't make it fake.

[RandomGuy]

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hater: still sandinistas trolling.
celibate: still a nazi
koriwhat: still an imbecile with calf tats

[koriwhat]

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

"remember, you can't read wikileaks only we can."

[spurraider21]

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

while this is nice in principle, there is also the notion of credibility. benefit of the doubt, etc.

[koriwhat]

Hater: still sandinistas trolling.
celibate: still a nazi
koriwhat: still an imbecile with calf tats

fuzzy: still a got who thinks he's so damn cool

[RandomGuy]

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".

i never claimed such a thing.

however, ing about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. reality, right?

Not saying you did say such a thing. I am merely trying to figure out how one tells the difference between fake and not fake. You can say what you think clearly here.

Trump says, without exception that all the bad coverage is fake.

Do you accept this as truth?

[RandomGuy]

while this is nice in principle, there is also the notion of credibility. benefit of the doubt, etc.

Very true. One should apply more skepticism to some than others. Even so, really dodgy sources occasionally hit on something important and valid. One has to take things with some critical thinking.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

fuzzy: still a got who thinks he's so damn cool

It's been a few weeks since that discussion yet you still hold onto it. Now you need to tell the board again about how calm, cool, and collected you are. You spam posting rants which boil down to alt-right and/or conspira talking points provides a nice counterpoint.

[koriwhat]

Not saying you did say such a thing. I am merely trying to figure out how one tells the difference between fake and not fake. You can say what you think clearly here.

Trump says, without exception that all the bad coverage is fake.

Do you accept this as truth?

could be. i have no clue. i don't watch cnn, msnbc, fox, etc... i don't watch tv for christs sake. i am linked to videos from said channels at times and just smh at the way those anchors present themselves. other than the occasional video and article, i don't put much stock in MSM news outlets.

when my own local news reports about some old ladies cat in a tree i know we've reached the end of an actual news source. so em all!

[koriwhat]

It's been a few weeks since that discussion yet you still hold onto it. Now you need to tell the board again about how calm, cool, and collected you are. You spam posting rants which boil down to alt-right and/or conspira talking points provides a nice counterpoint.

you're a got. that's no conspiracy.

[RandomGuy]

could be. i have no clue. i don't watch cnn, msnbc, fox, etc... i don't watch tv for christs sake. i am linked to videos from said channels at times and just smh at the way those anchors present themselves. other than the occasional video and article, i don't put much stock in MSM news outlets.

when my own local news reports about some old ladies cat in a tree i know we've reached the end of an actual news source. so em all!

You don't read, and you don't watch news, but you just *know* its all biased.

What would you expect press coverage of a truly ty president to look like?

[hater]

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

Yup and it goes both ways

Unfortunately the mainstream media has been flooding mostly fake news as there is no proof of Russia collusion and they keep getting material from “sources” which they do not disclose. Just like the example I posted in page 2. Rehash and repeat daily

[koriwhat]

What would you expect press coverage of a truly ty president to look like?

a lot of ass kissing tbh... lol