It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Real Fake News List by Ron Paul

page: 4
84
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: dreamingawake

They also "coluded with Trump"...such is the nature of journalism, confirming stories, soliciting facts etc.

You seem to be selling BS... to propagandize you must first "remove the referee"..the other fallacy being sold is "false equivalance"...

All so the right wing can feel better about believing the lies they want to believe.



Legal Definition of collude colluded colluding : to agree or cooperate secretly for a fraudulent or otherwise illegal purpose


This is incorrect

They also "coluded with Trump"...such is the nature of journalism, confirming stories, soliciting facts etc.

www.merriam-webster.com...

Who is selling B.S.?




posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Dr. Paul has more to say about "fake news":

The latest liberal attack on free speech in America is not coming from any particular politician, but, instead, it is coming from the tech world.


Ron Paul has lashed out against Google and Facebook’s ridiculously unethical new policies.


follow the link to: Leftist Professor Who Wrote The 'Hit List' Of "Fake News" Sites

What about Twitter? If you haven't already heard.:
Twitter has begun suspending user accounts linked to the 'alt-right' movement




edit on 11/21/2016 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I love that the people who can't afford their own birth control think they're the arbiters of fake news. Sorry bros the big dogs are in charge now.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

Donna Brazile shared a question from the primaries with the Clinton campaign. Apart from that the Podezta leaked emails show standard reporter / subject correspondence that has been claimed to be something it is not.

Remember that a leaked document showed Donald's trumps entire Q and A with Black Leaders as being fully scripted in advance.

The campaign to discredit mainstream news media is aimed at "removing the referee" so that full right wing propaganda and fake news will be accepted unchallenged.

That might not be comfortable to some people's world view, but it is reality.
edit on 21-11-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: dreamingawake
I accept all of that. When I said that the piece was propaganda itself, that was not to say that that the information disseminated was not true but rather to point out that it did not go far enough and hence served another purpose other then just exposing fake journalism. The number one rule of propaganda is to tell the truth as much as possible. The propaganda then slides in between the cracks. Omitence is a very large crack.


Fair enough.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: dreamingawake

They also "coluded with Trump"...such is the nature of journalism, confirming stories, soliciting facts etc.

You seem to be selling BS... to propagandize you must first "remove the referee"..the other fallacy being sold is "false equivalance"...

All so the right wing can feel better about believing the lies they want to believe.

I'm selling BS? Huh, okay. Right, great ad hom, as I must be personally making something off it this.


edit on 21-11-2016 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

Donna Brazile shared a question from the primaries with the Clinton campaign. Apart from that the Podezta leaked emails show standard reporter / subject correspondence that has been claimed to be something it is not.

Remember that a leaked document showed Donald's trumps entire Q and A with Black Leaders as being fully scripted in advance.

The campaign to discredit mainstream news media is aimed at "removing the referee" so that full right wing propaganda and fake news will be accepted unchallenged.

That might not be comfortable to some people's world view, but it is reality.

There's been a non partisan movement to show what MSM news is for a long time. It's not all boiled down to RW only.
Any thoughts on the LW discrediting of the RW? I mean they were pushing Twitter, etc., bans and the professor came out first about a fake news list. RP's sharing of this is a direct reply to that.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake

I think since news stopped being a public service and became a profit center, the MSM started to sell stories with headlines and stoke controversy over non issues. Opinion news centers like MSNBC and Fox evolved where the could promise advertisers a loyal audience since they stroked their audiences worldviews...predictable demographics means cash.

All of that is different than actually inventing facts and sources like writing fiction.
One spins..the other begins with a lie. They both suck...but one sucks a whole lot more and in signifIcant and relevant ways. Spin vs. invented stories. Bias vs fake news. Obama's policies suck vs. Obama runs pedophilia ring.

You can make a choice not to care as long as the stories appeal to your confirmation bias...but the brain is plastic and it is a dangerous thing to do routinely to your brain. Best to just call BS when you see it whoever is selling ....thinking objectively is good.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: dreamingawake

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: dreamingawake

They also "coluded with Trump"...such is the nature of journalism, confirming stories, soliciting facts etc.

You seem to be selling BS... to propagandize you must first "remove the referee"..the other fallacy being sold is "false equivalance"...

All so the right wing can feel better about believing the lies they want to believe.

I'm selling BS? Huh, okay. Right, great ad hom, as I must be personally making something off it this.



I didn't mean that you were get a check cut for your post. What I took issue with was that you consider collusion as the nature of investigative journalism. Again, the definition of "collusion is secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose."



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

Donna Brazile shared a question from the primaries with the Clinton campaign. Apart from that the Podezta leaked emails show standard reporter / subject correspondence that has been claimed to be something it is not.

Remember that a leaked document showed Donald's trumps entire Q and A with Black Leaders as being fully scripted in advance.

The campaign to discredit mainstream news media is aimed at "removing the referee" so that full right wing propaganda and fake news will be accepted unchallenged.

That might not be comfortable to some people's world view, but it is reality.


I have nothing against scripted Q & A's. Broadcasters do this all the time with their interviews on TV. My problem is that giving one side questions in advance in a debate for a national election gives them an unfair advantage. It gave Trump the right to say it was rigged.

Hillary's townhall meetings were scripted and I have no problem with that. It was her Townhall meeting and she wanted it to go well.
edit on 11/21/2016 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

He was not responding to you. He was responding to me.

As for your response to him while confusing him for me.

I fully understand the definition of collusion.

I also understand that is ethical and even demanded of journalists to present stories, quotes etc to subjects of that story before actually publishing, so someone has a chance to confirm or dispute details, facts, how they were quoted etc before release.
That is why stories have that bit about ...so and so was asked to comment but did not respond..or the so and so campaign was asked to comment and said x.

The leaked podesta emails between journalists were spun to be something they are not.

That is propaganda BS...the agend is to discredit MSM and other sources critical of someone's agenda. It allows to lie freely and dismiss the fact checkers.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: IronBoy
I love that the people who can't afford their own birth control think they're the arbiters of fake news. Sorry bros the big dogs are in charge now.


Dogs are way cooler. You're left left with swamp things.

Believe me.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5


Sorry to butt in on your conversation.

As for the Podesta email leaks. The only one that I am aware of that held any weigh re: reporters was this one:

www.thepoliticalinsider.com...

If you looked at the campaign as it progressed the reporters dogged Trump with gotcha question about his past and criticized him for everything e.g. for taking time off the campaign to attend grand opening of the restoration of the Post Office into a Trump Hotel that was his daughter's accomplishment. What parent wouldn't do that? Their coverage was totally biased and all I could think of was is the people are being brainwashed. 1984 has arrived.

Oh well, he got his chance to let them have it:

Donald Trump’s media summit was a ‘f—ing firing squad’

edit on 11/21/2016 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

That was an invite list of reporters that were expected to be traveling with the Clinton campaign? So he invited them to a dinner party? What do you think is wrong there? It doesn't mean collusion it means Podesta wants to be on friendly terms with the reporters "bus"? Every presidential candidate in history has had the same thing..the bus of reporters that follow them for a year..and every campaign head socialized with them.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

That was an invite list of reporters that were expected to be traveling with the Clinton campaign? So he invited them to a dinner party? What do you think is wrong there? It doesn't mean collusion it means Podesta wants to be on friendly terms with the reporters "bus"? Every presidential candidate in history has had the same thing..the bus of reporters that follow them for a year..and every campaign head socialized with them.


Sorry you have been misinformed.

Wikileaks: Journalists Dined at Top Clinton Staffers’ Homes Days Before Hillary’s Campaign Launch



1) Thursday night, April 9th at 7:00p.m. Dinner at the Home of John Podesta. His address is 3743 Brandywine St NW in Washington, DC. This will be with about 20 reporters who will closely cover the campaign (aka the bus).

2) Friday night, April 10th at 6:30p.m. Cocktails and Hors D'oeuvre at the Home of Joel Benenson. His home address is 60 E. 96th Street, #12B, New York, 10128. This is with a broader universe of New York reporters.




Several top journalists and TV news anchors RSVPed “yes” to attend a private, off-the-record gathering at the New York home of Joel Benenson, the chief campaign strategist for Hillary Clinton, two days before she announced her candidacy in 2015, according to emails Wikileaks has published from John Podesta’s purported accounts. The guest list for an earlier event at the home of John Podesta was limited to reporters who were expected to cover Clinton on the campaign trail.


Take a look at the email. It is linked in the article "email thread starts" colored blue. Can I can this any easier to understand


Do you think Jeff Zucker, President of CNN and Arianna Huffington, President and CEO of the Huffington Post would sit on the campaign bus???


edit on 11/21/2016 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Love Ron. Can't stand Rand.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

They refer to the list as the "bus".. those covering the campaign. Common term for the traveling reporter pool on a campaign. And please don't post someone's spin as fact. Read the emails and it is nothing untoward or unusual. It is not collusion...on the other hand Trump HIRES the chairmans of Fox News and Briebart? Nothing to see there...wow..head spinning BS around here.
edit on 21-11-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

They refer to the list as the "bus".. those covering the campaign. Common term for the traveling reporter pool on a campaign. And please don't post someone's spin as fact. Read the emails and it is nothing untoward or unusual. It is not collusion...on the other hand Trump HIRES the chairmans of Fox News and Briebart? Nothing to see there...wow..head spinning BS around here.


Please re-read my edited thread and see that there were two separate dinners. One of the bus reporters and the other for top journalist and news anchors.
edit on 11/21/2016 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yes, what I found was that Ron this list is comprised of almost entirely of wikileaks as the source. Also that all the emblems on the picture depict sources that are considered 'liberal' by Americas radical conservatives.


Is wikileaks not a good source?

What is a radical conservative?



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Oh joy, another harebrained conspiracy from the alt-left.
Also, nice touch trying to conflate documented interference in a debate from the biggest news producer in the world with that what you claim. I'll even give it to you, despite knowing full well its false. But even then, those two things aren't even close to being the same thing. Are you eating paint chips as an adult? How might someone fall so far from reality to make this digestible?

I really am speaking in earnest.

Are you suggesting that the myriad of proven leaked emails are not true? That even if it was ONLY one question from the head of the DNC it's somehow ok? That it's ok that multitudes of journalist hacks (in their own words) are somehow in the right to feed Hillary's campaign, to scrub stories, to rewrite and amend knowingly false instances? .....and thennnnnnn....to do the exact opposite with Trump. I'd wish not to have to spell it out here but I know you will gloss over anyway so at least there can be a record of that:

writing false stories
cutting statements and reordering words to suit their agenda
attacking him with rhetoric at every turn
having every network but fox run the same stories 24/7

I am sincerely asking you to reply with a cogent thought. Not more "right wing extremist" drivel. Keep it in the moment. When you pop off all over hell then it just makes all those other things you talk about sound even more incredible.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join