The Liberal Media Bubble

The goal is to be able to handle multiple viewpoints from outside sources and then critically develop your own view given that information and your own experience. I have found the whole discussion of what is factual extremely interesting because there is the event and then there are multiple views of the event. Watch Kurosawa's Rashomon for that dynamic. I'm not perfect and my own personal experience tends toward the left-of-center, but I try to read a lot of different things that poke holes in my arguments and if I find them convincing, I often sand down the edges of my views.

I think the big problem now is that most commentators (on both sides) look at a segment of a problem or issue and not the entire problem or issue. When one concentrates solely on the negative or positive of a segment of a problem or issue without gauging the entire context, it distorts the entire decision-making process.

Of course, I grew up on a farm and sooner or later the pragmatic reigns in that world (as it should in most realms). Debating about how to haul the hay doesn't get the hay in the barn.
 
The issue is right wing media, mainstream or social, is so far to the right from the center that it makes left slanted news look the exact same distance from the center on the opposite side.

Mainstream left is closer to the center. if you want to find the middle point you'd have to say it's right of center-right which slants the stories more. False equivalency is a big deal.
 
Forever Fredi said:
The issue is right wing media, mainstream or social, is so far to the right from the center that it makes left slanted news look the exact same distance from the center on the opposite side.

Mainstream left is closer to the center. if you want to find the middle point you'd have to say it's right of center-right which slants the stories more. False equivalency is a big deal.
Click to expand...

Oof.

Okay, Zito.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Do you know how many times I've been attacked on this very board for pointing out that Rush Limbaugh is "full of ****e"?
Click to expand...

If you didn't date yourself with the Don Ho reference you certainly did by mistaking Rush Limbaugh as being politically relevant in 2017.
 
Forever Fredi said:
The issue is right wing media, mainstream or social, is so far to the right from the center that it makes left slanted news look the exact same distance from the center on the opposite side.

Mainstream left is closer to the center. if you want to find the middle point you'd have to say it's right of center-right which slants the stories more. False equivalency is a big deal.
Click to expand...

If the mainstream left was as close to center as you think; Trump wouldn't had been elected and more people wouldn't watch Fox News than every other news organization put together.

Fox News is closer to the center than MSNBC or CNN.
 
Krgrecw said:
If the mainstream left was as close to center as you think; Trump wouldn't had been elected and more people wouldn't watch Fox News than every other news organization put together.

Fox News is closer to the center than MSNBC or CNN.
Click to expand...

"Closer to the center" of the current national vogue ideology is not necessarily "closer to accuracy", though. That's not a trivial point.

In your calculus you also discount the half of the nation that doesn't regularly consume any news media from any "major" source yet still has opinions about these things (and, resoundingly, this cycle, that opinion was they thoroughly detested both major-party candidates).
 
I was arguing with a person on FB the other day (I know I know... but can't helpmyself)... she was of course going on and on about RUSSIA! as a reason to impeach.

I commented saying there's not been any evidence to prove this, so I asked her on what grounds would he be impeached.

Her response: "You must listen to Rush"

That was it.

Now to that point - no. I don't. And that is a typical awful argument for someone who otherwise has none.

Secondly - what I stated was a fact. She then assumed I was wrong bc I listened to Rush.

It got me thinking - what the heck are her news sources telling her? And is it accurate?

After all:

C6t4kXtWYAA2QEA.jpg:large


I think her sources of information are much more dangerous than mine
 
I think anyone who is remotely concerned with acting in good faith should concede that there is currently no available evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

I also suggest that there is enough circumstantial evidence out there to warrant a thorough and independent investigation of same.

I share your frustration with people who think that it's self-evident and the president should be impeached. That's dumb. I'm similarly frustrated by people who seem to want to cover their eyes and not find out if there's fire underneath the obvious smoke.

We can do this without destroying the republic.
 
I'd love to know if Rush had any listeners who didn't qualify for AARP.

The cool kids like their white nationalism served with a side of dank memes and irony, not old school welfare-queen victim-blaming.
 
Hawk said:
If you didn't date yourself with the Don Ho reference you certainly did by mistaking Rush Limbaugh as being politically relevant in 2017.
Click to expand...

Hey, Don put Ho on the map!!! If he wasn't dead he should sue the crap out of the entire hip hop industry for copyright infringement!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top