Tweet
The video didn't matter with Planned Parenthood either. The sting operators became the crooked story instead of Planned Parenthood when the media became involved. They were prosecuted and eve story went away.
-
-
.Comment
-
Can't tell if trolling.Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
You linked a borderline hate-site as the source for your point because he was reporting about the video. Trust the video (which was not credible) but not the editorial content?
I agree there is media bias at most major media outlets. Alex Jones' material is not a good way to prove it.Comment
-
So, I read and listen to Alex Jones?Originally posted by Play Angry View PostThere are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
-
Not a trap. I have a brother in law that is, err, was a huge Bernie supporter. We were having a discussion and he kept during Fox News barbs at me, labeled me a racist Trump supporter and then said, I needed to work harder than to rely on Rush Limbaugh for my talking points. I had enough, I then reminded him that I don't spend much, our any time listening to the radio, or Rush Limbaugh for that matter, that I was an early adopter cable cutter, so Fox News was out of the question and I had no intention of voting for Trump! I finished by stating that while everything else that he threw out was innaccurate, but didn't bother me, I took it personal that someone that I thought I knew do well could simply offhand accuse me of racism.Originally posted by Play Angry View Post
Anymore, when I see these type of generalities, I ask.There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
Thank you for the unrelated anecdote. I did not accuse you of racism and am sorry if you misread that into a post stating:
...in response to the discussion of a direct link to his website.Originally posted by Play Angry View PostComment
-
What does it matter what website the video was posted to - it was on other sites also (I think I saw it on the daily mail myself). The point is it was showing a positive interation with Trump and the black community and the feed was pulled and was ignored by the main stream media.Originally posted by Play Angry View PostComment
-
If you are addressing my point that this particular website is not a credible news source, it is because the video is not what it was purported to be by the site that broke the story. You are trusting they are telling you the truth about the context of what you are watching.
If you are saying, "I don't want to talk about the website, I just want to talk about the video," that is fine, and it is not directed at my point.Comment
-
I don't trust any news source, "mainstream" or otherwise, to give me truth in context. That goes for Fox, CBS, Breitbart or Mother Jones.Originally posted by Play Angry View PostThere are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
What is not credible about the video?Originally posted by Play Angry View PostKung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
What is credible about it, in the context it was presented?Originally posted by Kung Wu View PostComment
-
Media is biased. I don't think that needs to be a topic of discussion. If there's someone who isn't aware that the media is biased, I'd rather not engage in discourse with that person.
The irony in this thread (I love irony) is that we've been directed to a biased media source that's informing us that the media is biased. We already knew the media was biased.
If there are any posters or readers on this board who didn't already know that media is biased, please find another board on which to post. I prefer communicating with people with at least minimal perception skills.
One more thing. I pretty much knew from before the feed was cut that some African-Americans who seemed to be Jewish were praising Trump. The fact that the actual prayer (or whatever was coming next) was cut did not dilute or diminish the fact that there are people thought to be on Trump's hate list who support him. the message of support was clearly evident in the recorded portion.
If I'm the producer on that gig and I want to avoid showing anything positive about Trump, I'm going to pull the plug on the cameras much sooner and I'm going to make it look like a power or equipment issue.
Are there any Jewish posters on here who might enlighten us about prayer ceremonies? Is there maybe something in Judaism that discourages publication of those ceremonies?Last edited by Aargh; September 8, 2016, 12:37 AM.The future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
We like to cut down nets and get sized for championship rings.Comment
-
The raw video is credible. Including the discussion amongst the cameraman and producer.It is raw footage, unedited, that has not been disputedOriginally posted by Play Angry View PostThere are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
What is happening in the video is very much in dispute.Originally posted by MoValley John View Post
It was presented as Reuters staff arbitrarily cutting off filming during a fairly boring but positive interaction between Trump and the black minister, presumably because it was just that - a positive image that should not be filmed because it undermines a media narrative focused on his incredibly low approval ratings within that demographic (although it wasn't a live broadcast so the outrage is a little weird - not like anything especially noteworthy was happening to the point that networks (biased or not) would purchase the footage and air it).
It now has been confirmed that no Reuters staff were involved, and parties present claim the cameraman was being told to cut filming by the CBS pool manager because Trump staffers were herding the media pool out of the congregation hall to the motorcade (I believe even the Trump campaign has not disputed this explanation).
So, yea, it shows a clip of a guy being told by someone with authority over him to stop filming, and him arguing back that he's going to continue filming. What third-party media outlet (if any, they may be freelancers) they work for is unknown, the reason filming is halted is very much disputed, and the original parties attributed to the story were false.
I don't think that is credible since the context provided to the audience was so off-base. I guess you could try to make the argument that literally every unedited video is credible because it shows, well, what it shows...but that is definitely a stretch.Comment
Comment