- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Was CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, etc. considered fake news before Trump?
Posted on 3/2/19 at 11:52 pm to RighteousTiger
Posted on 3/2/19 at 11:52 pm to RighteousTiger
Yes. But no Republican ever really took it on and called the press out for being dishonest or hypocritical for covering the right differently than the left.
But the most hilarious part is “fake news” was actually coined by journalists against Republicans. So they essentially labeled themselves
But the most hilarious part is “fake news” was actually coined by journalists against Republicans. So they essentially labeled themselves
Posted on 3/3/19 at 2:13 am to RighteousTiger
No I don’t believe they were considered fake news before Trump. That was before they succumbed to TDS. They are so biased now, they are consumed with hate and jealousy. Have you ever considered the possibility that YOU are the brainwashed sheep?
Posted on 3/3/19 at 2:19 am to RighteousTiger
You are singing in the shower and think you are ready for a broadway show.
You are not nearly as smart as you think you are.
Dumbest post of the week.
You are not nearly as smart as you think you are.
Dumbest post of the week.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 2:20 am to NPComb
Truth, when it isn't sailing 800 miles over their heads, will almost always alienate the willfully stupid.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 8:28 am to TGFN57
We should all chip in and buy the OP a copy of Bernard Goldberg's book "Bias." It's an approximately twenty year old book it shouldn't cost more than ten dollars or so by now.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 8:39 am to RighteousTiger
My answer the op is YES.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 8:41 am to RighteousTiger
You sir, are an idiot.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:03 am to RighteousTiger
Good lord.
Yeah, nobody was calling out "Journolist" before Trump.
Another mentally ill retard.
You did hit all the solid MSM talking points, though. I'll give you that. Definitely well programmed Proggy.
Yeah, nobody was calling out "Journolist" before Trump.
Another mentally ill retard.
You did hit all the solid MSM talking points, though. I'll give you that. Definitely well programmed Proggy.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:04 am to RighteousTiger
I realized that the MSM had a left wing slant back in 1965. I had no idea who Trump was back then.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:09 am to RighteousTiger
Journalism has always had some sort of taint to it.
There was the Yellow Journalism days back in the late 1800’s when newspapers were the only source for information. During these days the drum beat of the printing press led to the Spanish American War. It was called yellow because the paper was so cheap it turned yellow, and the stories printed were with the same style as the National Enquirer but on a local level.
Then back in the World War I, World War II, and Korean War days tight government control of the press censored or controlled news stories about the war could be considered propaganda.
In the early days of TV news, direct sponsorship of news (your Esso reporter) led to tight control as to what was said and how.
Then the graphic nature of the TV coverage of Vietnam led to the eventual end of the draft and the quagmire of the war.
Then the fever pitch coverage of the Watergate scandal and eventual resignation of Richard Nixon.
I could go on to modern day stuff because that is when it exploded once you started to have cable news, talk radio, and the internet once opinion replaced information in the media.
I will say this about modern journalism is when you have pundants talking about something about politics and they use the same code words or terminology to describe something or someone is what is troubling in today’s media environment.
This has been going on since the 1990’s. I would laugh my arse off when Rush would play a montage of these pundants or reporters saying the same thing almost verbatim. It kinda makes you wonder who is colluding with who.
There was the Yellow Journalism days back in the late 1800’s when newspapers were the only source for information. During these days the drum beat of the printing press led to the Spanish American War. It was called yellow because the paper was so cheap it turned yellow, and the stories printed were with the same style as the National Enquirer but on a local level.
Then back in the World War I, World War II, and Korean War days tight government control of the press censored or controlled news stories about the war could be considered propaganda.
In the early days of TV news, direct sponsorship of news (your Esso reporter) led to tight control as to what was said and how.
Then the graphic nature of the TV coverage of Vietnam led to the eventual end of the draft and the quagmire of the war.
Then the fever pitch coverage of the Watergate scandal and eventual resignation of Richard Nixon.
I could go on to modern day stuff because that is when it exploded once you started to have cable news, talk radio, and the internet once opinion replaced information in the media.
I will say this about modern journalism is when you have pundants talking about something about politics and they use the same code words or terminology to describe something or someone is what is troubling in today’s media environment.
This has been going on since the 1990’s. I would laugh my arse off when Rush would play a montage of these pundants or reporters saying the same thing almost verbatim. It kinda makes you wonder who is colluding with who.
This post was edited on 3/3/19 at 9:16 am
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:16 am to RighteousTiger
quote:
CNN
Yes. Very fake news. As far back as the 90s, they were called "The Clinton News Network."
quote:
ABC
Yes.
quote:
NBC
Hell, yes. Their longtime anchorman, Tom Brokaw, was considered and vetted for the VP spot for Kerry in 2004 - while he was still the active anchor.
quote:
MSNBC
Possibly faker than CNN, but at least they make no bones about it.
quote:
Fox News
Least fake of the bunch, if you want to know the truth about it.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:17 am to RighteousTiger
Those outlets were able to control narratives through virtue signaling BT (before Trump). Call a conservative politician or proposal sexist/racist/evil and watch them backpedal to lose the label. Trump DNGAF. He brushes aside these criticisms. The left media isn’t used to that not working so they have moved from exaggeration to lying in their coverage. That’s why no one takes it seriously now. Their message is always predictable. Trump can do nothing right. Do you not see this?
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:54 am to RighteousTiger
MSNBC and CNN definitely were considered as such.
Posted on 3/3/19 at 9:57 am to RighteousTiger
Yes. No one had the balls to call them out but yes they have been spewing a lot of false propaganda for years.
Dan Rather and the faked Bush performance review ring a bell?
Dan Rather and the faked Bush performance review ring a bell?
Popular
Back to top

0







