DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Fake News sites

Nope, I didn't ignore it, I didn't see it.

Wanna repost it or give me a link to it

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-dr...donations/?_r=0

Was a quick Google search. Most of the links came up from those "fake" websites and Fox News. You know what didn't come up? ABC, NBC, etc. This is exactly what some of us are saying, in that the media is going to present the news to you in the way they want you to see it. They may not outright lie, but they'll make mountains out of molehills and turn mountains into molehills.

None. I'm not an idiot.

Repost...
NBC's Brian Williams lied and was exiled to MSNBC.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/busine...six-months.html

NBC Fired a Producer Over Manipulated 911 Call in Trayvon Martin Case.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-florida-shooting-nbc-idUSBRE83609U20120407

I get my news the good old fashion way.

I hang out at the Barber Shop.

This doesn't bother me as much as the Internet bots that popped up did. They were EVERYWHERE.

I use to post that many times in my younger days on the original board

Sounds like nothing to me about Stephnapolois (damn, if that was my name I'd change it)

He made donations, decided that it was probably not right because of appearances and decided to put it out there for everyone to see.. What's wrong with that.

EVERY SINGLE news outlet in the world operates on the premise that "catch their eye and they'll stick with us until the commercial is over"

But, here's the difference, a real news organization will tell you just the facts when they come back from commercial break. FOX, MSNBC and those of that ilk will not do that. No full disclosure.

Brietbart and infowars are simply racist rags (well, not rags but sites)

Most of those listed on what I supplied didn't exist a few years ago. They were concocted by guys like Banner to spread lies and misinformation.

But I don't see where ABC, NBC and CBS are not credible sources of news. Do they make mistakes, who doesn't.

I don't believe 1 + 1 EVER = 2 with U ....

Here I thought CNN was bad. Sorry Daman but I don't know what you see when you go to CBS. I've tried for the last two months to read from their site, only to realize EVERY headline is a bash Trump and it's all Trumps fault. This site is worse than FOX news ever thought about being. Talk about slanted. MSN is really tame compared to CBS. Talk about sour grapes, it was bad before the election, now it's just un-readable. It's sad that people really read this garbage.

Trumps new Air Force One is almost ready...

http://www.vidiload.com/17052/the-new-air-force-one/

It's all about your personal beliefs. If a person thinks Trump is all that and a bag of chips, then anything negative said about him means the network is bias against him.

Reverse that, and it's a fair network...LOL Cracks me up.

All your MSM is biased garbage. Just look at the "commentators" they have on the show. They're not people who know what they are talking about. They are former workers of former administrations. They are the campaign managers. The party leadership. You guys are getting your news from both parties' mouths. It's honestly kinda funny to watch.

I remember a time when the News and Commentary were separate things.

That explains the haircut! lol

Only after Politico broke the story. Holy Crap, you really don't think Steph is biased? He was a chief advisor to Bill Clinton and was balls deep in the Whitewater controversy. In 2006 he was a featured attendee and panel moderator at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative and is a regular participant in Clinton foundation events. Cripe, just listen to the softballs he tossed Hillary compared to how he treated Trump.

Walter Cronkite, perhaps?

It's been a very long time ago.

Ahh the good ole days. Walter Cronkite, Huntley/Brinkly, Edward R. Morrow.

You knew it was news when they just reported it. And you knew what commentary was because the said, the following is a commentary.

Yes, even to the point when Kennedy was dead, all Cronkite had to do was announce it and slowly remove his glasses. That said it all! News, Commentary and Humanity at once.

When I saw Norah O'donnell's name on the list, I knew right there that this list was bull....

I know Norah personally, no way she would collude with Clinton or the Democrats... She never did and most likely never will like Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton, she does however like Chelsea. I'm told by her that Chelsea is a pretty sweet lady in private. Not much like her parents at all.

Ron Paul doesn't have any agenda here I suppose LOL

It says it's "sourced" but then links to the main page of wikilinks. The text itself is in one big image, so you can't click on any of the individual "source" links.

Yes, I noticed that. But if Ron Paul wrote it? I trust him, pretty much.

Yup. How dare main street media report the stupid crap he says and does. He's dialing up gullible America directly with a 140 character tweet of stupidity that they alone will believe.

You still don't get it. It is no longer the main street media, it has proven itself to be the Liberal/Progressive Propaganda Machine. It is not about reporting what is said, it is about twisting what is said and pimping their agenda of Trump bad, Libby Think good.

Yeah Yeah Yeah.. Double standards from the righty tighties as usual. Yeah the networks report the news as they see it. It's called freedom of press.

By passing the press by using tweeter is just another way to go directly to the typical gullible American with fake and childish agenda's, rants, and insults. I'm sure your lot will believe him word for word.

It never ceases to amaze my that those who defend the second amendment unconditionally are the first who denounce the first amendment and freedom of speech. But whatever.

Freedom of the press means the networks get to decide what news we should receive.

Did you really just type that?

"news networks report the news as they see it." Nice try though.

I fail to see how retyping it with news in front of the statement makes any difference. We deserve the truth to decide for ourselves, not some homogenized version any particular organization decides is all we need to hear.

We???? Then by all means we shouldn't listen to any of the news because sometimes they report the crap our leaders say and do.

Nobody is forcing you to watch, read, listen. 1/3 of gullible America only believes what they hear on the internet and Tweeter anyways and once again it doesn't effect you one little bit. It just gives you a platform to whine from and to stir the pot more. Good lord we know your lot loves to do that.

Regardless it works both ways. Turn around is fair play. The first amendment and freedom of speech is a double edge sword, just like the second amendment and the right to bare arms.

Keep in mind, the guy you are replying to was just fine saying the housing market lost 20-30% since 2006, yet repeatedly refused to cite any links.

So, yeah, I do believe he believes the press should be free to report any old lie they want.

Freedom of press, get over it. Only the gullible believe everything they hear in the press and the BS they're feed on social media.

But by all means keep whining about it as if it effects you somehow.

Yeah. Got a link to that lie you tried to pawn off as truth about home values? For about the 7th time, thanks in advance.

(you remember, right? You claimed homes had lost 20-30% of their value since the bubble popped in 2006. You know, the artificial high of the housing market?)

Wrong thread troll. There is plenty of info out there, not that you'd believe any of it anyways.

Especially since you couldn't link to it in the right thread. Troll? Meet mirror.

When point blank asked numerous times, you've hidden from your claim that todays home values are 20-30% less than they were in 2006.

You answered no questions in that thread, and here you are ignoring again. It'd be neat if I could make claims and not back them up, yet still expect everyone to believe them.

Last I saw, it was Facebook that wants to ban whatever websites they feel are "fake news", and the democrats want to try and stifle any news source that they feel isn't representing the way they want it.

They're also the ones calling for the ban of guns and for the repeal of the Electoral College. But like you said, whatever.

Sure am glad things have calmed down since the election is..."finally over"..

Yes. But some of them have a point. I read an article about abcnews.com.go which I've seen linked on here. The article was about the creator fantasied himself a satirist and loved making a fool out of conservatives on facebook for monetary gain. I was going to link the article when I read it, but the dude was such a jerk. But here it is:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...-because-of-me/

I understand it is a problem though, and I really wouldn't mind holding media organizations to some sort of standard of credibility. The problem is, how do you do that? Who gets to choose who's credible and who's fake?

That's not the problem. The problem is, how do we get people to start searching for real information and journalism instead of sensationalized news that are a last ditch effort to save a dying industry.