*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[TheSpoonald]

I'm bitter about the lack of an unbiased American news outlet and the lack of fact-checking and journalistic integrity that is indicative thereof.

I think you just need to accept that any news source is going to have a human bias. Ben Shapiro is a conservative, if you listen to his podcast, you're going to get a conservative take on the news. If you watch Maddow, you'll get the opposite.

When exactly was American news unbiased? Wouldn't you say that things are better now because at least the bias is on the label? At least you know what you're getting rather than sitting in front of your TV and nodding along to any old prick reading a teleprompter and telling you that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

I actually think it's better with the bias. Then you can hear both sides if you want. Getting both sides is a really good way to make sure you know what the fuck you're talking about.

And do your own fact-checking. WaPo and Politico are really bad at it.

[Poopadoop]

Getting both sides is a really good way to make sure you know what the fuck you're talking about.

Actually, getting the plain facts is the best way to do that.

Watching how the facts are spun, distorted, or flat out altered is just a really good way to get your biases confirmed and/or be confused about what is actually going on.

[TheSpoonald]

Actually, getting the plain facts is the best way to do that.

Watching how the facts are spun, distorted, or flat out altered is just a really good way to get your biases confirmed and/or be confused about what is actually going on.

Are you just determined to be a shit today or what?

tell me professor....where does one get "the plain facts"?

[Poopadoop]

banana.jpg

tell me professor....where does one get "the plain facts"?

Nowhere in the MSM, that's the problem.

But, you can find sources that aren't openly biased. Just because you choose to ignore them doesn't mean they don't exist.

Edit: And when i say "you" I mean it in the general, collective sense. I don't mean specifically "you, banana"

[TheSpoonald]

But, you can find sources that aren't openly biased.

Not "openly" bias huh? Sounds totally legit.

I'd much rather have the bias in the open, than hidden or obscured. Wouldn't you?


If you're trying to tell me that UN-biased sources exist....then I call bullshit.

[Poopadoop]

I'd much rather have the bias in the open, than hidden or obscured. Wouldn't you?

I already answered that and I already told you why. Go back two posts and read it again. Consult a dictionary if you need to.

If you're trying to tell me that UN-biased sources exist....then I call bullshit.

Of course you do.

[Poopadoop]

Also it's not that their bias is 'open', as in they come out and say 'here's a biased report, enjoy' it's just blatant. There are plenty of people who can't see blatant bias if it smacks them in the face. There's others who see it and since it matches their own bias, it doesn't register as bias.

Having a 'hiidden bias' is much more difficult to accomplish, which is why it's very rare. A bias almost always makes itself visible.

[TheSpoonald]

Also it's not that their bias is 'open', as in they come out and say 'here's a biased report, enjoy' it's just blatant.

Not sure what you're watching, but I see Fox acknowledge it's conservative tilt all the time. MSNBC clearly knows what it is. So does Vox. So does Ben Shapiro. So does Breitbart. NYT and WaPo pretty much admit to be tabloids now.

CNN, for a while to be the "objective" news sources. But it didn't work. Everyone knows what they are too.