The Trump Presidency

[Julio3000]

Not necessarily.

Always consider the source, read from multiple sources, question the angle. That's how you establish credibility. You don't assign it arbitrarily based on whether or not a publication tells you what you want to hear.

NYT leans left (and is owned by Carlos Slim, who despises Trump), WSJ leans right. RT is government funded (but so is the BBC). Breitbart is a news-aggregator/blog that just happens to have White House ties. All of these things should factor into any critical reading of the press. Now, obviously, for many, they don't.

BBC = RT?

[Hawk]

BBC = RT?

Do you remember David Kelly?

The BBC is no different than Xinhua.

[Julio3000]

Do you remember David Kelly?

The BBC is no different than Xinhua.

Sure I do.

Again, BBC = RT?

[Hawk]

Again, BBC = RT?

Where are you trying to go with this?

I said that RT and BBC were both funded by their respective governments and that should be a factor in how one analyzes their credibility. So, yeah, in that sense BBC = RT.

In terms of budget and reach? No, RT ≠ BBC.

. . .

[Hawk]

Meanwhile, in the Netherlands:

Dutch far-right candidate Geert Wilders has been widely criticised for putting a Photoshopped picture of a political opponent on his Twitter account and then calling his rival a "drama queen" when he complained about it.

Anti-Muslim politician Wilders posted a tweet with the head of D66 rival Alexander Pechtold superimposed on another face in an old picture from a demonstration to impose Sharia law in the Netherlands.

The tweet asked: "Is this the next step?"

Pechtold complained and said on his Facebook page "that in times for fake news and alternative facts, it cannot be predicted what such fake pictures can cause".

Several other politicians joined in the criticism, but Wilders retorted in another message: "Stop moaning, drama queen."

http://www.independent.ie/world-news...-35429504.html

---

I wonder what words Mr. Wilders would have for my friend 57.

[Julio3000]

Where are you trying to go with this?

I said that RT and BBC were both funded by their respective governments and that should be a factor in how one analyzes their credibility. So, yeah, in that sense BBC = RT.

In terms of budget and reach? No, RT ≠ BBC.

. . .

Ok. How about journalistic integrity and credibility?

[Julio3000]

Meanwhile, in the Netherlands:

Dutch far-right candidate Geert Wilders has been widely criticised for putting a Photoshopped picture of a political opponent on his Twitter account and then calling his rival a "drama queen" when he complained about it.

Anti-Muslim politician Wilders posted a tweet with the head of D66 rival Alexander Pechtold superimposed on another face in an old picture from a demonstration to impose Sharia law in the Netherlands.

The tweet asked: "Is this the next step?"

Pechtold complained and said on his Facebook page "that in times for fake news and alternative facts, it cannot be predicted what such fake pictures can cause".

Several other politicians joined in the criticism, but Wilders retorted in another message: "Stop moaning, drama queen."

http://www.independent.ie/world-news...-35429504.html

---

I wonder what words Mr. Wilders would have for my friend 57.

You a big fan of his?

[Hawk]

Ok. How about journalistic integrity and credibility?

BBC has no more journalistic integrity than RT.

As for credibility, well, I already answered that question for you once.

[Hawk]

You a big fan of his?

He's a one-trick pony.

But man, that hair.

[Julio3000]

He's a one-trick pony.

But man, that hair.

That hair is epic.

[Julio3000]

BBC has no more journalistic integrity than RT.

As for credibility, well, I already answered that question for you once.

Yikes.

[Julio3000]

To expound a little bit...

Publicly funded broadcaster from a robust and pluralistic democracy = publicly funded broadcaster from a repressive kleptocracy run by the espionage apparatus. Gotcha.

[Hawk]

To expound a little bit...

Publicly funded broadcaster from a robust and pluralistic democracy = publicly funded broadcaster from a repressive kleptocracy run by the espionage apparatus. Gotcha.

Espionage apparatus? I mean, I always thought Larry King was a communist ... but damn.

When the BBC doesn't cough up sources (who mysteriously turn up dead) under government pressure - during a controversial war, at a crucial moment of public inquisition - then maybe we can have a real discussion about journalistic integrity instead of falling back on the Russian kleptocracy trope.

[Julio3000]

Espionage apparatus? I mean, I always thought Larry King was a communist ... but damn.

When the BBC doesn't cough up sources (who mysteriously turn up dead) under government pressure - during a controversial war, at a crucial moment of public inquisition - then maybe we can have a real discussion about journalistic integrity instead of falling back on the Russian kleptocracy trope.

Trope. Ok. This conversation isn't going anywhere.

[Hawk]

Trope. Ok. This conversation isn't going anywhere.

Julio. Just because Russian vodka comes from Russia doesn't necessarily mean it's swill.

Does the Russian government influence what RT produces? Purportedly. Does that mean there is a direct line from the Kremlin to RT bureaus in London/Miami/NYC/etc? I don't think so.

RT generally produces good news. Their reporting on Eastern Europe, Middle Eastern affairs, and China is very good ... mainly because Western outlets don't have an audience, resources, or political interests there.

We love to hate Al-Jazeera, but watch it for 5 minutes and you reap more information about the current state of affairs in that region of the world than you do in 45 minutes of listening to the World Service.

To borrow an idiom from you, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Julio3000]

Julio. Just because Russian vodka comes from Russia doesn't necessarily mean it's swill.

Does the Russian government influence what RT produces? Purportedly. Does that mean there is a direct line from the Kremlin to RT bureaus in London/Miami/NYC/etc? I don't think so.

RT generally produces good news. Their reporting on Eastern Europe, Middle Eastern affairs, and China is very good ... mainly because Western outlets don't have an audience, resources, or political interest there.

To borrow from you, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Maybe it does. My point is that, institutionally, I'm not going to put it on par with a state broadcaster from a, you know, actual functioning democracy...and that fact is going to color the organization's big-picture credibility.

I will pay closer attention, though.

[goldfly]

Speaker of the British House of Commons announces his opposition to Pres. Donald J. Trump addressing Parliament during his state visit to the U.K., citing the body’s "opposition to racism and to sexism and our support for equality before the law and an independent judiciary."

Cheers to you House of Commons

[mqt]

What in the actual ****?

Although in the White House's defense, nobody covered the San Bernadino shootings because that place doesn't exist.

[zitothebrave]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7565136.html

[goldfly]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7565136.html

What a ****ing joke