The Fourth Estate

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:02 am

I think Delt is trying to lock one of us into saying the UK was wrong to arrest that reporter based on THEIR laws.
I will not allow myself to be backed into that ridiculous corner.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:22 am

DreadNaught wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Again...The media is allowed to report on it. They just had to wait until the trial was over. I don't recall any of you being upset about this until now. This isn't an attempt to stop free speech/freedom of the press. This law is in place specifically to protect civil liberties and guaranty a free trial. I guess it's just the world that we live in now with the 24-hour news cycle and some people need their news right now.


Underage girls are being kidnapped and raped. It should be reported on regardless of whatever trial(s) are occurring. Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. It's one of the big reasons press freedom is such an important freedom and covered in the very first amendment of the US Constitution.

It seems like a pretty cut and dry issue for me.

I think where TR got himself in trouble legally might have been not so much that he covered the issue, but how and who he covered specifically.

It seems like the alleged crimes of people like Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby shouldn't have been allowed to covered by the press until their trials were completed by this logic b/c doing so could interfere with the bias of potential jurors. That simply is not a position I agree with.

Shining a light on something isn't how you put an end to it. You catch the offenders and put them in jail. That's how you put an end to it.
Who gives a **** if we have to wait a while to hear about Bill Cosby's crimes? If the offenders are on trial then the crime isn't being committed anymore. Again...What does it matter if you hear about it now or if it's a little down the road?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:24 am

Buc2 wrote:I think Delt is trying to lock one of us into saying the UK was wrong to arrest that reporter based on THEIR laws.
I will not allow myself to be backed into that ridiculous corner.


If that is the case I think it's missing the bigger and much more important issue and why this story is making news. I'm sure the UK police was acting IAW with whatever interpretation of their laws and didn't arrest TR unlawfully. I don't think anyone here was making that argument either.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:29 am

Buc2 wrote:I think Delt is trying to lock one of us into saying the UK was wrong to arrest that reporter based on THEIR laws.
I will not allow myself to be backed into that ridiculous corner.

That's right. You stand up for yourself, champ!
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:30 am

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
Underage girls are being kidnapped and raped. It should be reported on regardless of whatever trial(s) are occurring. Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. It's one of the big reasons press freedom is such an important freedom and covered in the very first amendment of the US Constitution.

It seems like a pretty cut and dry issue for me.

I think where TR got himself in trouble legally might have been not so much that he covered the issue, but how and who he covered specifically.

It seems like the alleged crimes of people like Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby shouldn't have been allowed to covered by the press until their trials were completed by this logic b/c doing so could interfere with the bias of potential jurors. That simply is not a position I agree with.

Shining a light on something isn't how you put an end to it. You catch the offenders and put them in jail. That's how you put an end to it.
Who gives a **** if we have to wait a while to hear about Bill Cosby's crimes? If the offenders are on trial then the crime isn't being committed anymore. Again...What does it matter if you hear about it now or if it's a little down the road?


Because the people on trial aren't the only ones doing it delt. So how does waiting help protect he next potential victim or deter the next person from committing this act?

I completely disagree that press coverage doesn't aid in putting an end to issues (I never stated it was the only way). One of the main jobs of the press is to bring awareness to issues in society so people can bring about change.

Take police violence for example. Are you saying the media shouldn't be able to report on police shootings until the investigations and potential trials are completed so that future jurors aren't persuaded one way or another before the trial?

Are we doing it wrong in America and should we adopt this UK policy?
Last edited by DreadNaught on Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby RedLeader » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:31 am

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
My issue is with penchant to side with big brother in free speech matters like these in western society. It's dangerous imo.

I'm not disputing or upset that TR broke the law. He violated what he judge had instructed and is paying the price. My issue is the lack of free speech protection from the government occurring here and how that could manifest in America in the future.

I know we talk alot about free speech in this country and it gets conflated to align w/ specific narratives (see NFL protests). But the thing I believe we all (should) agree on is that Free Speech should be protect individuals, and especially the press from 'the state' fining or imprisoning them. That doesn't seem to be the case in this situation w/ TR and that is the angle I'm viewing it from.

I don't care if it's some white guy like TR covering rape/grooming gangs, or some POC investigating neo-Nazis. They stories should be allowed to be covered regardless of the narratives.

The fact is that these grooming gangs are an under reported issue in the UK. When muslim reformers mention them it's ignored in the MSM, and when a non-muslin covers them he's met with -phobia tags and government intervention.

Again...The media is allowed to report on it. They just had to wait until the trial was over..


You keep saying this like its true. However, if they deem that the reporting of a judgement could affect jurors on other existing, ongoing cases, they can shut it down as well.

Not that i think thats even a real good point on your end, just got tired of seeing you say it like it was.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2610
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 95 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am

DreadNaught wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Shining a light on something isn't how you put an end to it. You catch the offenders and put them in jail. That's how you put an end to it.
Who gives a **** if we have to wait a while to hear about Bill Cosby's crimes? If the offenders are on trial then the crime isn't being committed anymore. Again...What does it matter if you hear about it now or if it's a little down the road?


Because the people on trial aren't the only ones doing it delt. So how does waiting help protect he next potential victim or deter the next person from committing this act?

I completely disagree that press coverage doesn't aid in putting an end to issues (I never stated it was the only way). One of the main jobs of the press is to bring awareness to issues in society so people can bring about change.

Take police violence for example. Are you saying the media shouldn't be able to report on police shootings until the investigations and potential trials are completed so that future jurors aren't persuaded one way or another before the trial?

Are we doing it wrong in America and should we adopt this UK policy?

I'm not necessarily saying that we're doing it wrong. I just don't think that it's that crazy of a policy and I'm not sure why you guys are so upset about this policy in another country. You are acting like it's in place to violate civil rights as opposed to protect them (I'm assuming because that's what you're told to think).
And you said, "Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. So you didn't literally say it's the only way, but I'm not going to getting into a bootz-like argument with you.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:08 am

RedLeader wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Again...The media is allowed to report on it. They just had to wait until the trial was over..


You keep saying this like its true. However, if they deem that the reporting of a judgement could affect jurors on other existing, ongoing cases, they can shut it down as well.

Not that i think thats even a real good point on your end, just got tired of seeing you say it like it was.

Umm...ok...put an "S" at the end of the word "trial" if it makes you feel better.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby RedLeader » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:22 am

deltbucs wrote:
RedLeader wrote:
You keep saying this like its true. However, if they deem that the reporting of a judgement could affect jurors on other existing, ongoing cases, they can shut it down as well.

Not that i think thats even a real good point on your end, just got tired of seeing you say it like it was.

Umm...ok...put an "S" at the end of the word "trial" if it makes you feel better.


Lol. Ya, id say thats a minor distinction, wouldnt you?

Just didn't want you to continue looking like a fool on the point... Although, you're making it tough overall.







But by all means, carry on.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2610
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 95 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:36 am

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
Because the people on trial aren't the only ones doing it delt. So how does waiting help protect he next potential victim or deter the next person from committing this act?

I completely disagree that press coverage doesn't aid in putting an end to issues (I never stated it was the only way). One of the main jobs of the press is to bring awareness to issues in society so people can bring about change.

Take police violence for example. Are you saying the media shouldn't be able to report on police shootings until the investigations and potential trials are completed so that future jurors aren't persuaded one way or another before the trial?

Are we doing it wrong in America and should we adopt this UK policy?

I'm not necessarily saying that we're doing it wrong. I just don't think that it's that crazy of a policy and I'm not sure why you guys are so upset about this policy in another country. You are acting like it's in place to violate civil rights as opposed to protect them (I'm assuming because that's what you're told to think).
And you said, "Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. So you didn't literally say it's the only way, but I'm not going to getting into a bootz-like argument with you.

Who's upset?
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:45 am

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
Because the people on trial aren't the only ones doing it delt. So how does waiting help protect he next potential victim or deter the next person from committing this act?

I completely disagree that press coverage doesn't aid in putting an end to issues (I never stated it was the only way). One of the main jobs of the press is to bring awareness to issues in society so people can bring about change.

Take police violence for example. Are you saying the media shouldn't be able to report on police shootings until the investigations and potential trials are completed so that future jurors aren't persuaded one way or another before the trial?

Are we doing it wrong in America and should we adopt this UK policy?

I'm not necessarily saying that we're doing it wrong. I just don't think that it's that crazy of a policy and I'm not sure why you guys are so upset about this policy in another country. You are acting like it's in place to violate civil rights as opposed to protect them (I'm assuming because that's what you're told to think).
And you said, "Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. So you didn't literally say it's the only way, but I'm not going to getting into a bootz-like argument with you.


I'm not upset at all. I believe you were the one who requested a follow up response from some people here.

I suppose I don't agree that TR covering this issue is a violation of the accused's civil rights even if that is how that UK law is interpreted. That surely isn't the case in this country.

My point was never about he UK laws either way, and it seems that isn't the case with you so there in lies the disconnect perhaps. I just beleive from a freedom of the press perspective the UK has this wrong for the reasons I've stated.

I still love you. :D
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:45 am

Buc2 wrote:
deltbucs wrote:I'm not necessarily saying that we're doing it wrong. I just don't think that it's that crazy of a policy and I'm not sure why you guys are so upset about this policy in another country. You are acting like it's in place to violate civil rights as opposed to protect them (I'm assuming because that's what you're told to think).
And you said, "Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. So you didn't literally say it's the only way, but I'm not going to getting into a bootz-like argument with you.

Who's upset?

I'm not upset, you're upset!! :teeth:
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:51 am

DreadNaught wrote:
deltbucs wrote:I'm not necessarily saying that we're doing it wrong. I just don't think that it's that crazy of a policy and I'm not sure why you guys are so upset about this policy in another country. You are acting like it's in place to violate civil rights as opposed to protect them (I'm assuming because that's what you're told to think).
And you said, "Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. So you didn't literally say it's the only way, but I'm not going to getting into a bootz-like argument with you.


I'm not upset at all. I believe you were the one who requested a follow up response from some people here.

I suppose I don't agree that TR covering this issue is a violation of the accused's civil rights even if that is how that UK law is interpreted. That surely isn't the case in this country.

My point was never about he UK laws either way, and it seems that isn't the case with you so there in lies the disconnect perhaps. I just beleive from a freedom of the press perspective the UK has this wrong for the reasons I've stated.

I still love you. :D
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:58 am

DreadNaught wrote:
Buc2 wrote:Who's upset?

I'm not upset, you're upset!! :teeth:

Your mom goes to college!
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:00 pm

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:I'm not upset, you're upset!! :teeth:

Your mom goes to college!

She's waiting on Bernie so it will be free!!!
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:45 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Your mom goes to college!

She's waiting on Bernie so it will be free!!!

Nice
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby MJW » Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:22 am

deltbucs wrote:
MJW wrote:
This is the wrong question. The question is not whether or not someone who breaks the law is going to be arrested, or whether or not it should matter to us that he already knew he'd be arrested. The question is if this law is a just one. It's a reasonable question. I don't think this law was conceived from an ideological place, even if the response to it is ideological. But that doesn't mean ideological questions shouldn't be asked.

It's the wrong question because you don't like it.


I don't like it because it's banal.

"Well, he knew he'd get arrested again, so it's his own fault!" is a **** talking point. Or am I misinterpreting you?
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8432
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 191 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Fri Jul 20, 2018 7:49 am

Conservative comedian and commentator Steven Crowder has begun a new segment on his YouTube channel called “Crowder Confronts,” where he and his team will do what the mainstream media won’t, and actually call a person out for their slander or calls for violence where everyone can see it.

Too often, the media’s leftist bent will cause it to ignore things that a leftist or protected group would do, yet wouldn’t dream of allowing anyone on the right to get away with. One of the things it tends to ignore is the constant calls for violence against the right from the left.

During one of Crowder’s “Change My Mind” segments on the fact that there are only two genders, an angry transgender individual posted Crowder’s location and suggested people do him harm, and destroy his property in order to teach him a lesson. Naturally, this didn’t sit well with Crowder and his crew, who found the trans individual and proceeded to ask him in person why he said what he said.

The entire episode made waves and prompted Jessi Cape of the Austin Chronicle to “report” on the incident. I put “report” in quotations because what she really wrote was an opinion piece laced with inaccuracies that she attempted to pass off as actual reporting titled “JuiceLand Employee Harassed by Right-Wing Comedian.”

The journalist accused Crowder of releasing the location of the transgendered individual’s job (he didn’t, she did in her post), and accused him of being alt-right (Crowder is shown on multiple occasion to denouncing the alt-right on his channel). Cape neglected to post the video I posted above to her article, which is the video she was writing about and omitted key details about the video in her article to make Crowder appear more like a villain. She also claims to have reached out to Crowder but instead contacted a line at CRTV who Crowder is affiliated with, but does not work for.

Crowder confronted Cape with her inaccuracies over the phone and received interesting responses to his statement of facts. For one, Cape repeatedly told Crowder that the facts — such as the fact that he’s not alt-right — were just his opinion. Crowder goes through the details Cape omitted, and at the end summarized Cape’s horrid lack of journalistic integrity.

This video is important, not just because it was fun to watch, but because this is the sad state of journalism in 2018. Cape fell into the bad habit of believing that her opinion is fact and that Crowder’s actual facts were just opinions. This belief that her politics are the politics of truth allowed Cape to write her story and call it journalism.

The question is, where does Cape get the hubris to end up at that conclusion? Crowder is quite literally showing her that she is factually incorrect, and yet Cape either can’t or won’t recognize that she had committed journalistic malpractice. This would have been completely forgivable if she was writing an op-ed, but she wasn’t. As she tells Crowder, she considers herself a journalist and what she was reporting was what actually happened. All statements to the contrary are just “opinion.”

Subscribing to a political philosophy does not automatically make you more correct than someone else when it comes to storytelling. Journalists are human and are bound to get things wrong from time to time for a plethora of reasons. However, having the facts handed to you on a silver platter after making little effort to get the facts, and STILL denying the facts once you’ve been confronted with them is the exact opposite of being a journalist.

That makes you an ideological activist. Cape is definitely one, and sadly there are too many like her in today’s media, especially in the mainstream parts of it.

And then they wonder why people trust the media less and less.


Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:17 am

Not sure how many have followed this story, but it's an example of far left wing organizations having too much influence in the media. Here we have the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) which was a group that was instrumental in bringing down the KKK decades ago and has since become a tool to drive the PC and the leftist agenda. Major tech companies like Google, YT, FB actually contract the SPLC to filter was is considered 'hate speech/hate content' on their platforms.

The SPLC finally is getting exposed for what it is and this won't be the last lawsuit we see them settle.

For those who are not aware Maajid Nawaz is pretty fascinating guy. He and his organization Quillette are an interesting media platform for those that appreciate nuanced articles/discussion on polarizing topics.

Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:10 am

Buc2 wrote:
Conservative comedian and commentator Steven Crowder has begun a new segment on his YouTube channel called “Crowder Confronts,” where he and his team will do what the mainstream media won’t, and actually call a person out for their slander or calls for violence where everyone can see it.

Too often, the media’s leftist bent will cause it to ignore things that a leftist or protected group would do, yet wouldn’t dream of allowing anyone on the right to get away with. One of the things it tends to ignore is the constant calls for violence against the right from the left.

During one of Crowder’s “Change My Mind” segments on the fact that there are only two genders, an angry transgender individual posted Crowder’s location and suggested people do him harm, and destroy his property in order to teach him a lesson. Naturally, this didn’t sit well with Crowder and his crew, who found the trans individual and proceeded to ask him in person why he said what he said.

The entire episode made waves and prompted Jessi Cape of the Austin Chronicle to “report” on the incident. I put “report” in quotations because what she really wrote was an opinion piece laced with inaccuracies that she attempted to pass off as actual reporting titled “JuiceLand Employee Harassed by Right-Wing Comedian.”

The journalist accused Crowder of releasing the location of the transgendered individual’s job (he didn’t, she did in her post), and accused him of being alt-right (Crowder is shown on multiple occasion to denouncing the alt-right on his channel). Cape neglected to post the video I posted above to her article, which is the video she was writing about and omitted key details about the video in her article to make Crowder appear more like a villain. She also claims to have reached out to Crowder but instead contacted a line at CRTV who Crowder is affiliated with, but does not work for.

Crowder confronted Cape with her inaccuracies over the phone and received interesting responses to his statement of facts. For one, Cape repeatedly told Crowder that the facts — such as the fact that he’s not alt-right — were just his opinion. Crowder goes through the details Cape omitted, and at the end summarized Cape’s horrid lack of journalistic integrity.

This video is important, not just because it was fun to watch, but because this is the sad state of journalism in 2018. Cape fell into the bad habit of believing that her opinion is fact and that Crowder’s actual facts were just opinions. This belief that her politics are the politics of truth allowed Cape to write her story and call it journalism.

The question is, where does Cape get the hubris to end up at that conclusion? Crowder is quite literally showing her that she is factually incorrect, and yet Cape either can’t or won’t recognize that she had committed journalistic malpractice. This would have been completely forgivable if she was writing an op-ed, but she wasn’t. As she tells Crowder, she considers herself a journalist and what she was reporting was what actually happened. All statements to the contrary are just “opinion.”

Subscribing to a political philosophy does not automatically make you more correct than someone else when it comes to storytelling. Journalists are human and are bound to get things wrong from time to time for a plethora of reasons. However, having the facts handed to you on a silver platter after making little effort to get the facts, and STILL denying the facts once you’ve been confronted with them is the exact opposite of being a journalist.

That makes you an ideological activist. Cape is definitely one, and sadly there are too many like her in today’s media, especially in the mainstream parts of it.

And then they wonder why people trust the media less and less.






Thanks for posting this, I’ll check it out. I’m not the biggest fan of Crowder but I’ll give it a shot. The premise seems good
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5442
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:24 am

Not a fan of Crowder's antics, but he's targeting a younger demo than myself. But he's funny at times and while certainly conservative he's repeatedly taken stances to denounce the alt-right and extremist behavior associated.

Personally I don't care if a person is conservative or progressive, I care whether they acknowledge extremist ideological behavior and denounce it. People have tendency to have blind spots to extremism within their own groups and like Nawaz stated in the clip above there are three major forms of extremism in existence today that need to be pushed back against and those are the far-right, far-left, and Islamists.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:40 am

DreadNaught wrote:Not sure how many have followed this story, but it's an example of far left wing organizations having too much influence in the media. Here we have the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) which was a group that was instrumental in bringing down the KKK decades ago and has since become a tool to drive the PC and the leftist agenda. Major tech companies like Google, YT, FB actually contract the SPLC to filter was is considered 'hate speech/hate content' on their platforms.

The SPLC finally is getting exposed for what it is and this won't be the last lawsuit we see them settle.

For those who are not aware Maajid Nawaz is pretty fascinating guy. He and his organization Quillette are an interesting media platform for those that appreciate nuanced articles/discussion on polarizing topics.



If the SPLC was objective in applying their hate group labels they’d have to denounce themselves as a hate group
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5442
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Ken Carson » Fri Jul 20, 2018 12:02 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:
Buc2 wrote:




Thanks for posting this, I’ll check it out. I’m not the biggest fan of Crowder but I’ll give it a shot. The premise seems good

I watched it. He made good points, but it kinda felt cheap at the end when it was a gotcha moment. “You realize Texas is a one-party consent state, right?”
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 172 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Fri Jul 20, 2018 12:03 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:


Thanks for posting this, I’ll check it out. I’m not the biggest fan of Crowder but I’ll give it a shot. The premise seems good

I watched it. He made good points, but it kinda felt cheap at the end when it was a gotcha moment. “You realize Texas is a one-party consent state, right?”

Yeah...there really wasn't any need for that. She didn't get it anyway, so...
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:08 am

Since WSJ is subscription based, I'll post the entire article here. Btw...I think WSJ showed a good sense of humor with their headline.

Image
Trump’s Honeymoon with Media Almost Over
Boston Globe urges independent newspapers to collude for the sake of criticizing Trump.
By James Freeman
Aug. 13, 2018 4:40 p.m. ET

For anyone who believes that the editorial pages of American newspapers have been insufficiently critical of President Donald Trump, the Boston Globe has a solution. Determined not to keep readers guessing, the Globe is urging editorial boards across the country to publish simultaneous condemnations of Mr. Trump’s rhetorical attacks on the press in their Thursday editions.

On Friday the Associated Press reported:
‘‘We are not the enemy of the people,’’ said Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor for the editorial page of The Boston Globe, referring to a characterization of journalists that Trump has used in the past. The president, who contends he has largely been covered unfairly by the press, also employs the term ‘‘fake news’’ often when describing the media.

Mr. Trump says that he is referring only to “fake news” purveyors—not all members of the press corps—as enemies. The AP report elaborated:
The Globe has reached out to editorial boards nationwide to write and publish editorials on Aug. 16 denouncing what the newspaper called a ‘‘dirty war against the free press.’’

As of Friday, Pritchard said about 70 outlets had committed to editorials so far, with the list expected to grow. The publications ranged from large metropolitan dailies, such as the Houston Chronicle, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Miami Herald and Denver Post, to small weekly papers with circulations as low as 4,000.

CNN said over the weekend that more than 100 newspapers have now agreed to participate. Organizing large coalitions of people to simultaneously express similar messages is generally the work of politicians and public relations executives, rather than journalists. Fortunately Americans are free to engage in such activity regardless of their chosen professions or how similar these professions may appear at any given moment.

The Globe invitation may pose a dilemma for some editorial page editors even if—like most people in their line of work—they loathe Mr. Trump. That’s because most editorial boards emphasize their independence from the newsrooms at their respective papers. For example, even the Globe says that its opinion pages are “completely separate from the news operation.” Yet they are willing to coordinate messaging with other journalists as long as they are outside the building?

The Globe also notes that its editorials “represent the official view of the Boston Globe as a community institution.” Journalists in other jurisdictions may not necessarily want to adopt the official view from someone’s else’s community.

Back in Boston, this is one case where the Globe’s editorial board may not benefit from its separation from the news staff. Reporters who have ventured out to talk to Republicans have likely discovered the common belief among such voters that media professionals are almost entirely lined up in opposition to Mr. Trump and tend to parrot each other’s attacks. Therefore announcing that dozens or perhaps hundreds of ostensibly independent editorial pages will publish similar Trump critiques at the same time probably isn’t the best way to expand readership among the rightward half of the electorate.

If the Globe’s effort is actually not intended to broaden its audience but instead to energize those who already oppose the President, this again may be a strategy more suited to politics than to journalism.

The AP has more on the point of all this:
Pritchard said she hoped the editorials would make an impression on Americans.

‘‘I hope it would educate readers to realize that an attack on the First Amendment is unacceptable,’’ she said. ‘‘We are a free and independent press, it is one of the most sacred principles enshrined in the Constitution.’’

The First Amendment does not say that the government cannot criticize the press. Mr. Trump enjoys free speech just as his media adversaries do. Rather, the First Amendment prevents government from infringing on the rights of Americans to speak and publish. And on that score, there’s a reasonable case that Mr. Trump’s predecessor presented a greater threat to press freedom, to say nothing of Mr. Trump’s 2016 opponent. Mrs. Clinton wanted to restrict the ability of Americans to make a documentary about her. We don’t recall editorial boards joining together to announce they were not with her.

As for the Globe’s current campaign, Journal editorial page Editor Paul Gigot says that this newspaper will not be participating.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10421
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 884 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Aug 14, 2018 9:02 am

I for one don't mind the media scrutiny on the President. The negativity is a bit hyperbolic at times, but it's better than the 8 years of puff pieces we had previously. But when the MSM is literally intertwined with the administration I guess we can't expect much scrutiny. I voted for Trump but believe the media needs to keep a very watchful eye on him. I'd just like it to be a bit more fair since there are positive things happening that get little to no coverage. Meanwhile we get wall to wall coverage in the MSM of a ridiculous rally where 20 people showed up b/c the MSM badly desires to foment hatred.

I just hope this level of scrutiny is the new normal to some degree. Trump brings alot of this on himself with his rhetoric and actions, but alot of it is also agenda driven by a MSM that despises the guy.

But the precedence of spinning every thing to most extreme negative will blowback when the next POTUS makes similar decisions on certain issues and it's not spun the same way, which will just further erode the trust people have in media.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12033
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Previous

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests