WHAT???? New York Times vows to 'rededicate' paper to reporting honestly///ADMITTED CONSPIRACY???

a reply to: Nothin

Reminds of a cheating husband, caught red-handed. " I swear dear. I'm gonna change. I'll never lie to you again".
Always is/was a bs storey. It's a blatant lie for all to see, but yet the blindly enchanted still want to believe the fairy-tale.

The NYT is primarily, and above all, a machine to make money. They've been busted in telling overt lies, to further the profits of their owners, partners, and advertisers. They're in damage-control mode.

Anyone volunteer to count the lies in today's edition?

They are legion, but they are going to do better, promise.

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: eNumbra

Real News is one Thing , Opinions are Another . To Expect the NYT to all of a sudden Embrace True Journalistic Integrity because they have been Caught in Very Numerous Lies is a Stretch . If Anything ,they will Now become the Small Voice of Discontent , to either be Heard or Ignored at your Own Risk ...

I don't expect them to change, least of all overnight.

But I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

If you Follow the Stock Market , I doubt there will be Much Disinformation in that coming from them .......)

a reply to: loam

Complete BS. Not your post but the MSNBC panel. Look at the smirk on the lady. She was fighting to keep herself from laughing.

They knew damn well what they were doing ALL along. They just got caught with not only their pants down but with their underwear down as well.

They are in survival mode since the Masses have become more aware of the MSM BS.

Don't buy it one bit, they are telling people what they think they want to hear.


The only one that I think was Sincere was Michael Moore and he came out before the verdict.

a reply to: interupt42

Complete BS. Not your post but the MSNBC panel. Look at the smirk on the lady. She was fighting to keep herself from laughing.

They knew damn well what they were doing ALL along. They just got caught with not only their pants down but with their underwear down as well.

They are in survival mode since the Masses have become more aware of the MSM BS.

Don't buy it one bit, they are telling people what they think they want to hear.


The only one that I think was Sincere was Michael Moore and he came out before the verdict.

I wonder how smiley they will be if there heroes are cooling there heels for 6 to 12 years.

March 9
THE ANTHROPOPHAGUS HAS QUITTED HIS DEN
March 10
THE CORSICAN OGRE HAS LANDED AT CAPE JUAN
March 11
THE TIGER HAS ARRIVED AT CAP
March 12
THE MONSTER SLEPT AT GRENOBLE
March 13
THE TYRANT HAS PASSED THOUGH LYONS
March 14
THE USURPER IS DIRECTING HIS STEPS TOWARDS DIJON
March 18
BONAPARTE IS ONLY SIXTY LEAGUES FROM THE CAPITAL
He has been fortunate enough to escape his pursuers
March 19
BONAPARTE IS ADVANCING WITH RAPID STEPS, BUT HE WILL NEVER ENTER PARIS
March 20
NAPOLEON WILL, TOMORROW, BE UNDER OUR RAMPARTS
March 21
THE EMPEROR IS AT FONTAINEBLEAU
March 22
HIS IMPERIAL AND ROYAL MAJESTY arrived yesterday evening at the Tuileries, amid the joyful acclamation of his devoted and faithful subjects


source

To little to late, I'll get my news from ATS.

a reply to: doobydoll

So, after they admit to lying and dishonesty we are now supposed to suddenly believe them when they say they'll now start being honest. Who's to say that that isn't one big fat lie too?

They are not admitting to lying and dishonesty, they are admitting that their biases kept them from seeing clearly. That is a very different thing. They reported what Trump was saying accurately, but did not understand why it would appeal to so many people. This colored their reporting and editorializing. They are still miles ahead of Fox and NBC.

originally posted by: Nickn3
To little to late, I'll get my news from ATS.

Please tell me you are being sarcastic. ATS will let hoaxes run wild without comment.

a reply to: Nickn3

To little to late, I'll get my news from ATS.

Funny thing is, ATS has more up to date news articles than most of the major sites.

a reply to: JacKatMtn

"THe NDAA needs to be repealed, so Propaganda against the citizens of the US is once again a punishable crime..."

Sorry to interrupt but could you be more specific?
From any source or specific source(s) I.e: Media only? Domestic or foreign citizens... Basically who do you want punished? What is your definition of propaganda?


The word although sounding simple and straightforward actually isn't.

Source and definition just click here. www.merriam-webster.com...

If you were to combine all the definitions into one super anti-propaganda law i personally think that other than people who've never heard of America or speak a language that's undecipherable would be the only one's unpunished.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Nothin

Reminds of a cheating husband, caught red-handed. " I swear dear. I'm gonna change. I'll never lie to you again".
Always is/was a bs storey. It's a blatant lie for all to see, but yet the blindly enchanted still want to believe the fairy-tale.

The NYT is primarily, and above all, a machine to make money. They've been busted in telling overt lies, to further the profits of their owners, partners, and advertisers. They're in damage-control mode.

Anyone volunteer to count the lies in today's edition?

They are legion, but they are going to do better, promise.

Bless your good intentions, but: What kind of a promise is that?
(Sorry if your line was sarcasm, as it wasn't an obvious delivery.)

a reply to: SPHARAOH

Here's some info on why I want the NDAA amended, repealed was perhaps too strong?

It relates to the SMith-Mundt act that protected us from direct gov't influenced propaganda via our US media outlets..

'Anti-Propaganda' Ban Repealed, Freeing State Dept. To Direct Its Broadcasting Arm At American Citizens

The US government has a bit of a PR problem at the moment, thanks to Ed Snowden's leaks and a decade-plus of general antipathy towards its constituents' rights and liberties growing out of its War on Terror.

Fortunately, the government now has a chance to aim its official version of today's news at US citizens, thanks to the repeal of a so-called "anti-propaganda" law earlier this month.

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts.

The Broadcast Board of Governors, which produces programming like the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, has been prevented from aiming its programming at Americans since the 1970's when the Smith-Mundt Act (which authorized the State Dept. to communicate with foreign audiences via many methods, radio being one of them) was amended to prohibit domestic dissemination of the BBG's broadcasts. This was done to distance the State Department's efforts from the internal propaganda machine operated by the Soviet Union.

Now, the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (part of the National Defense Authorization Act) has repealed the domestic prohibition, allowing the government's broadcasting to be directed at/created for Americans for the first time in over 40 years.

Hope that clarifies where I was coming from

a reply to: JacKatMtn

That makes scene.

If only we knew honest people that liked to type about things like this. Oh wait, where did that printer go? ATS, your source for unfiltered, biased in every direction, completely uncontrolled news. Who has a kids with bikes to deliver the papers?

originally posted by: JacKatMtn
a reply to: SPHARAOH

Here's some info on why I want the NDAA amended, repealed was perhaps too strong?

It relates to the SMith-Mundt act that protected us from direct gov't influenced propaganda via our US media outlets..

'Anti-Propaganda' Ban Repealed, Freeing State Dept. To Direct Its Broadcasting Arm At American Citizens

The US government has a bit of a PR problem at the moment, thanks to Ed Snowden's leaks and a decade-plus of general antipathy towards its constituents' rights and liberties growing out of its War on Terror.

Fortunately, the government now has a chance to aim its official version of today's news at US citizens, thanks to the repeal of a so-called "anti-propaganda" law earlier this month.

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts.

The Broadcast Board of Governors, which produces programming like the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, has been prevented from aiming its programming at Americans since the 1970's when the Smith-Mundt Act (which authorized the State Dept. to communicate with foreign audiences via many methods, radio being one of them) was amended to prohibit domestic dissemination of the BBG's broadcasts. This was done to distance the State Department's efforts from the internal propaganda machine operated by the Soviet Union.

Now, the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (part of the National Defense Authorization Act) has repealed the domestic prohibition, allowing the government's broadcasting to be directed at/created for Americans for the first time in over 40 years.

Hope that clarifies where I was coming from

Really hoping this gets reversed.

a reply to: bill3969

If only we knew honest people that liked to type about things like this. Oh wait, where did that printer go? ATS, your source for unfiltered, biased in every direction, completely uncontrolled news. Who has a kids with bikes to deliver the papers?

What

a reply to: seasonal
Just trying to say in a silly way, they can't be trusted. Only by showing both sides of the argument and letting the readers decide can the public make an informed decision. I learn more here than by any other source. Simply because all views, no matter how out there they seem, are presented here. Newspapers should be more like this site. We are the true media in this country, and we need a way to disperse all ideas. Weather we agree with them or not.

a reply to: seasonal

I think they can sense which way the wind is blowing. I suspect they will simply shift their rhetoric to pro-Trump. It's not going to be any more accurate, just playing to whatever ideology is in power.

originally posted by: loam
Joe Scarborough nails it.

Now that was a whole lotta truth in that clip.