The debate "The media in both sides is filled with lies and deceit so that they can get better ratings" was started by
October 23, 2016, 12:01 pm.
15 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 4 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
neveralone posted 20 arguments to the agreers part.
neveralone, Tobibroek, jack_tim_45, QueenSleepy, MlgLeprechaun69 and 10 visitors agree.
sabrina, grvshukla and 2 visitors disagree.
or end up in China.haha
if you feel like that.
I've recommended one several times. your free to check it out, or keep on digging blindly, your certain to find gold eventually!
like trying to find a needle in a hay stack while being blind and with no magnet.:-)
the 2 are a lot harder to divide in the online world, and that is where most of the fake news lies.
I mean you can have opinion shows on the same network, but not in the news.
the ideal is of course impossible, but we can have different standards.
it shouldn't be too hard to just quote and fact check without going off on an opinion based rant for a news site.
that is a challenge though isn't it? everything in our life's influence us. I would say it is one of the hardest things to do
I believe any media that can be considered "on a side" is filled with lies a deceit.
maybe your media shouldn't pick sides.
OK sounds good to me but back to what this is about. do u agree or disagree with the original statement?
it means she got caught and made an excuse. it doesn't mean she actually is a feminist. she just didn't want to take responsibility for her actions.
u would have to ask somone more in-depth then because that's the best answer I got.
because people do stupid shit and try not to take responsibility for it it or can't admit the actual reasons....
if you want to explore that take psychology, there's tons of explanations, crowd effects, and denial.
that doesn't represent broader movements.
personal experience. for example I've known women who said they got fired because they were a women but I happened to know it was because of stealing. or because they have a few advantages guys don't. for example if u want to go to college the worst person to be is a white male because any other race or sex gets free scholarships because they are a dif. race or are women. on a side not is it true that feminist groups believe that dressing like u work the streets is empowering? I heard this from a girl doing a presentation in college and wanted to see if it's legit.
what moves by women have made it seem that women are trying to be above men?
my guess would be we see it either as women wanting to be above men (whether correct or not there it is) because of their experience or because democratic are for it and there is no cohesion on either side so whatever one side says the other disagrees
then why is it all the rage in some right wing media? and only in those sites?
because a certain audience finds its sensational. sensationalist media doesn't have to be big names, it doesn't have to be main stream. it just has to prioritize profit instead of journalism.
I would say it's on its way out as well
np, so what do you say?
it's not really man hating feminism it's people hating reverse feminism.
my opinion on feminism has been fleshed out thanks to this app as every new right wing poster eventually makes a thread a out evil feminism, often along identical arguments. what I have found is that feminism is politically finished. most of their political tasks have been accomplished. their biggest hurdle nowadays is the double standard. something that is social and not something that can be tackled with protests except for from a workers rights perspective.
so I am really confused as to why feminism has such an outside presence in the right wing perspective.... the whole man hating feminism was a phenomena decades ago, is almost dead, and even at its peak was a fringe minority opinion.
u got that part right. I will concede on that.
how about u why do u say what u do?
and how many feminists do you know around you? in your tiny fraction of the earth?
why so you not say "the feminists I know" instead of "all feminists" considering your tiny sample pool? I won't argue your experience, I will point out it is anecdotal. but assuming the rest of the world fits your sample is intellectually criminal.
mostly on things like that feminism I get it from personal experience and also the people around me.
I hear ya. I was talking more about your general views and not this isolated post.
you seemed to agree on that thread about modern feminism, but there is no mention of that term or their ideas on any normal feminist literature. I can tell that you associated views with feminism that came from not feminists. any news source that would carry fraudulent opinions likely also carries fraudulent facts.
I was asking you for where you get your news so I can look at the site and give specific examples of articles that shout opinion and demonize one candidate consistently.
that's why with time I crosscheck everything though it's difficult to do that when people expect an immediate response. it's not u it's the app
perhaps, but that is irrelevant if the source of your verification is fraudulent news sites.
sounds like we're in agreement
except when it comes to someone's views, there is no he said she said. there is only one side, the person who holds those views.
you can check other feminist pages, but you can't tell someone they are wrong about what their views are.
now an event, or a lawsuit, that has 2 sides and should be checked on both sides. but not on fake news sites. something like whether feminists hate men or not is an opinion that can only be verified by a feminist source.
basically what I do but on feminist one I get both sides of the story so that I'm sure to avoid bias.
Google to confirm stories. economist and Forbes for economic issues, yahoo finance is amazing. and I generally go to sources.
I won't go to breitbart to read about the politics of feminists, I'll go to feminists. I also check the national review but find many of their articles lacking.
npr is my daily source for news. morning edition is my daily update. best part, they just quote the situation and the phrases and that's it. and they yell questions at everyone, get interviews with actually important people, and send actual reporters world wide to investigate.
so what exactly do u look at when getting ur news?
Democratic / Republican means nothing. both have stupid opinion medias.
and the best source to go to absolutely is the studies those media's cite themselves and judge them independently (or read peer reviews)
some sites I check are democratic and some are Republican. usually if u take out the extreme sides of the stories u can get a good idea on what's what
what sites do you check with?
I will usually see it on my phone then start figuring out fact from fiction on multiple sites if it's something important. obviously I would not do this about Justin Bieber new hair style or something stupid but definitely on something important
if you can't tell bad media, you need to educate yourself. I gave a good description of how to tell if your reading good media.
where do you get your news?
but thats just it most of the time u don't even realize it I think. if so then we got way too many people who don't think for themselves because most are blatantly bias that it's not even funny
both sides have garbage fake news. both sides have their extremes. most media obviously leans towards the sensational, but that is not the same as lies.
here's a hint. if your media is constantly bashing a single candidate or calling them saviors or horrible themselves (interviewees can voice opinions, not reporters), get a new source for news.