Breaking News CNN:Even without the buns, Trump's favorite fast-food meal is a diet-buster

a reply to: IAMTAT

I watch the movies (well at least I'm there playing on my phone) because I like the yoga pants!

Maybe eating McDonalds is a dog whistle to the KKK? After all, when IS he going to denounce David Duke?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

Words are just the audible/visual manifestations of thought.

Thoughts don't hurt unless you allow it.

Actions hurt people.

Communicating is an act.

Separating emotional and physical pain and claiming one is okay to inflict but the other isn't, just doesn't make sense.

Ask yourself if that's the conclusion you would have made if not programmed from childhood to think that way.

You consider it programming to be unaffected by words.

That's odd.

Absolutely. If we were unaffected by words, why does poetry, literature, music, and philosophy hold sway in our hearts?

We allow it to.

That's sad to me but I don't quite believe it. That's a story people repeat in their heads like a mantra.

Emotions come with the good and the bad. Spock isn't a goal we should be striving for.

I like this aspect of my humanity very much and wouldn't be willing to sacrifice it just so I wouldn't feel bad when I cause harm or have harm caused to me. A world like that sounds dystopian.

a reply to: face23785

Irony: calling people snowflakes and saying they have nothing better to do for bashing CNN for being snowflakes and having nothing better to do than to run a story about Trump's diet because they still can't get over the election.

Yes. It would appear you and others are no better than CNN.

Snowflakes all around.

Get your last word in so you can sleep tonight. I actually do have better things to do.

Don't we all? This is a pretty stupid topic to begin with.

Why should we care what he eats and why should we be so petty as to bash CNN for their error on the nutritional information of a milkshake?

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: pavil

Yeah! It's like getting a date wrong in an article........... Shoddy reporting is shoddy reporting.

Errors happen all the time in journalism. Where the integrity comes in to play is being willing to correct mistakes and admit to them.

This thread was to further illustrate some points about CNN and poke some fun at them at the same time.

I would say integrity is not running an "exclusive" without checking such a basic and vitally important thing as dates and timelines in this case. They didn't even seem to have Access to the actual email and still quoted the dates as fact. In fact, that basically anyone with a computer could find out they reported false information points to a lack of integrity in their editorial process. One could say even an intentional lack of effort in verifying the story. That people won't be suspended or fired for this further shows what a joke this is to CNN.

Integrity would be CNN plastering their mistake on their webpage and explaining why it occurred, not regulating it a footnote, then promptly burying the story on their website like the event didn't occur.

Fired for a story about fast food and an error about a milkshake's nutritional information?

Perhaps you are in the wrong thread?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: pavil

Yeah! It's like getting a date wrong in an article........... Shoddy reporting is shoddy reporting.

Errors happen all the time in journalism. Where the integrity comes in to play is being willing to correct mistakes and admit to them.

This thread was to further illustrate some points about CNN and poke some fun at them at the same time.

I would say integrity is not running an "exclusive" without checking such a basic and vitally important thing as dates and timelines in this case. They didn't even seem to have Access to the actual email and still quoted the dates as fact. In fact, that basically anyone with a computer could find out they reported false information points to a lack of integrity in their editorial process. One could say even an intentional lack of effort in verifying the story. That people won't be suspended or fired for this further shows what a joke this is to CNN.

Integrity would be CNN plastering their mistake on their webpage and explaining why it occurred, not regulating it a footnote, then promptly burying the story on their website like the event didn't occur.

Fired for a story about fast food and an error about a milkshake's nutritional information?

Perhaps you are in the wrong thread?

No..... For the big FU with Donald Jr and WikiLeaks. That's what I've been to referring to, not clearly enough it seems. This thread was supposed to be humorous, but as usual here, it goes where it wants.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: pavil

Yeah! It's like getting a date wrong in an article........... Shoddy reporting is shoddy reporting.

Errors happen all the time in journalism. Where the integrity comes in to play is being willing to correct mistakes and admit to them.

This thread was to further illustrate some points about CNN and poke some fun at them at the same time.

I would say integrity is not running an "exclusive" without checking such a basic and vitally important thing as dates and timelines in this case. They didn't even seem to have Access to the actual email and still quoted the dates as fact. In fact, that basically anyone with a computer could find out they reported false information points to a lack of integrity in their editorial process. One could say even an intentional lack of effort in verifying the story. That people won't be suspended or fired for this further shows what a joke this is to CNN.

Integrity would be CNN plastering their mistake on their webpage and explaining why it occurred, not regulating it a footnote, then promptly burying the story on their website like the event didn't occur.

Fired for a story about fast food and an error about a milkshake's nutritional information?

Perhaps you are in the wrong thread?

No..... For the big FU with Donald Jr and WikiLeaks. That's what I've been to referring to, not clearly enough it seems. This thread was supposed to be humorous, but as usual here, it goes where it wants.

Ok. Not sure what that has to do with this topic, but I suppose the premise still stands for that one as well.

I don't see why someone should be fired for making mistakes like that. It happens from time to time.

But I've noticed that people like to knee-jerk and act outraged over stuff like that. I guess they think it helps push their political narrative, but it doesn't. It just makes them look petty.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: pavil

Yeah! It's like getting a date wrong in an article........... Shoddy reporting is shoddy reporting.

Errors happen all the time in journalism. Where the integrity comes in to play is being willing to correct mistakes and admit to them.

This thread was to further illustrate some points about CNN and poke some fun at them at the same time.

I would say integrity is not running an "exclusive" without checking such a basic and vitally important thing as dates and timelines in this case. They didn't even seem to have Access to the actual email and still quoted the dates as fact. In fact, that basically anyone with a computer could find out they reported false information points to a lack of integrity in their editorial process. One could say even an intentional lack of effort in verifying the story. That people won't be suspended or fired for this further shows what a joke this is to CNN.

Integrity would be CNN plastering their mistake on their webpage and explaining why it occurred, not regulating it a footnote, then promptly burying the story on their website like the event didn't occur.

Fired for a story about fast food and an error about a milkshake's nutritional information?

Perhaps you are in the wrong thread?

No..... For the big FU with Donald Jr and WikiLeaks. That's what I've been to referring to, not clearly enough it seems. This thread was supposed to be humorous, but as usual here, it goes where it wants.

Ok. Not sure what that has to do with this topic, but I suppose the premise still stands for that one as well.

I don't see why someone should be fired for making mistakes like that. It happens from time to time.

But I've noticed that people like to knee-jerk and act outraged over stuff like that. I guess they think it helps push their political narrative, but it doesn't. It just makes them look petty.

One time mistakes you don't fire for . A pattern of making the same mistakes especially with news organization and ESPECIALLY with CNN since this has been a pattern, then that points to either a flaw in the Editorial process or an intentional disregard for the facts. Either of those deserve reprecussions.

They have had like 7 MAJOR messups in regards to Trump stories this year.....that we know of.

Now, because of CNN's ineptitude, I am forced to doubt their vericity. It's not Trump doing that, it's CNN's own incompetence in getting basic journalistic standards down. If you can't verify and check out a story, then perhaps you don't Run it. Don't weasel out and do the "other news organizations report" bit either. If you can't verify it, you don't run it. It's pretty simple.

a reply to: pavil

One time mistakes you don't fire for . A pattern of making the same mistakes especially with news organization and ESPECIALLY with CNN since this has been a pattern, then that points to either a flaw in the Editorial process or an intentional disregard for the facts. Either of those deserve reprecussions.

Or they are ran by humans, who are known for making mistakes.

They have had like 7 MAJOR messups in regards to Trump stories this year.....that we know of.

Only 7? For a news organization that runs thousands upon thousands of stories 24/7/365, that doesn't seem to be a big deal.

Don't weasel out and do the "other news organizations report" bit either. If you can't verify it, you don't run it. It's pretty simple.

So we are not supposed to hold other news organizations to the same standards?

That seems odd. I know CNN has been a target, but it seems inconsistent to hold this standard toward CNN and then openly dismiss the idea that other news organizations have similar issues.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: pavil

One time mistakes you don't fire for . A pattern of making the same mistakes especially with news organization and ESPECIALLY with CNN since this has been a pattern, then that points to either a flaw in the Editorial process or an intentional disregard for the facts. Either of those deserve reprecussions.

Or they are ran by humans, who are known for making mistakes.

They have had like 7 MAJOR messups in regards to Trump stories this year.....that we know of.

Only 7? For a news organization that runs thousands upon thousands of stories 24/7/365, that doesn't seem to be a big deal.

Don't weasel out and do the "other news organizations report" bit either. If you can't verify it, you don't run it. It's pretty simple.

So we are not supposed to hold other news organizations to the same standards?

That seems odd. I know CNN has been a target, but it seems inconsistent to hold this standard toward CNN and then openly dismiss the idea that other news organizations have similar issues.

If CNN is going to pride itself on being the trusted name in news, they need to now earn it. It's pretty obvious many of their TV people have a Liberal bias and now their reporting does.

The "other news organizations are reporting" bit is just another way to say it's not verifiable by us. If it's not verifiable by you, then don't spread what is basically a rumor.

If I were to say Twitter is reporting that Introvert is a Nazi homophobe, would I be following journalistic standards?

We have gotten away from basic reporting standards of this is what is said and this is how we actually verified it. CNN in it's latest fiasco, only did the first part.

And then to put the cherry on top of it...MSNBC confirmed it with only say the email was in "September" without actually giving a specific date.

Defend them all you want. You wouldn't defend Fox or a similar source the same way. ....bit they are biased, so it's ok.

a reply to: pavil

If CNN is going to pride itself on being the trusted name in news, they need to now earn it. It's pretty obvious many of their TV people have a Liberal bias and now their reporting does.

Are we talking political bias or making errors in reporting? Errors in reporting has nothing to do with bias. Mistakes are going to happen.

The "other news organizations are reporting" bit is just another way to say it's not verifiable by us. If it's not verifiable by you, then don't spread what is basically a rumor.

That is very common in network news. All of them do it.

If I were to say Twitter is reporting that Introvert is a Nazi homophobe, would I be following journalistic standards?

No. That would potentially have some libel/slander issues attached to it and a news organization would not run a story like that without verification.

Not a good example.

We have gotten away from basic reporting standards of this is what is said and this is how we actually verified it. CNN in it's latest fiasco, only did the first part.

And then to put the cherry on top of it...MSNBC confirmed it with only say the email was in "September" without actually giving a specific date.

CNN is just a small part of a bigger problem. Of course, they are also the target by many because of the Trump "fake news" propaganda effort.

Defend them all you want. You wouldn't defend Fox or a similar source the same way. ....bit they are biased, so it's ok.

Of course I would. Fox makes mistakes as well. It is bound to happen.

And yes, Fox is biased. So is CNN. That was never in dispute and it has little to nothing to do with the fact mistakes are going to be made.

What's really interesting is how so many of you jump on the anti-CNN bandwagon.

Flocks of sheep so easily herded.

well that is a heart attack inducing type diet. when michelle obama pushed for healthy food options for school age children the right makes a huge stink about it, i get it i get it, they want to have the right to feed their children heart attack inducing meals so you see it all comes around full circle

a reply to: introvert

No. That would potentially have some libel/slander issues attached to it and a news organization would not run a story like that without verification.

Not a good example.

Says you. News organizations did that with the Steele Dossier. ....they reported it and said they couldn't verify it themselves. They had the deniability of "well we are just reporting what BuzzFeed is saying". Say a lie often enough and the public will not distinguish it from the truth. Your side uses that line with Trump's lies, but they are pure virgin snow?

a reply to: pavil

Says you. News organizations did that with the Steele Dossier.

The Steele Dossier is a real document released to the news/public for people to read and digest.

Making specific accusations on twitter is completely different.

Say a lie often enough and the public will not distinguish it from the truth.

It appears even those that do not believe the "lie" are not very well informed.

Your side uses that line with Trump's lies, but they are pure virgin snow?

What side is that? I'm not a Democrat.

But at least we now know your angle. You're not interested in anything other than political partisanship.

Figures.

a reply to: introvert

Instead of Twitter then us NBC. You are missing my point. Me telling an unverified by me, NBC report about you, is ok?

a reply to: introvert

What side is that? I'm not a Democrat.

But at least we now know your angle. You're not interested in anything other than political partisanship.

Figures.

I call them as I read them. You are apolitical? Yeah. We've been down this road before......

Apply standards equally. News organizations hold themselves up on that high pedestal. When they do shoddy Journalism it will be called out. Today's society makes it easy to blur truth and fiction.

a reply to: pavil>>>> McDonald's.... yuck. he should go to a vegan diet like Bill Clinton so he also looks like a resuscitated mummy.

originally posted by: Dutchowl
a reply to: pavil>>>> McDonald's.... yuck. he should go to a vegan diet like Bill Clinton so he also looks like a resuscitated mummy.

Bill does look like he had all the life sucked out of him. Thought he might be I'll but I've never heard anything.

a reply to: ErrorErrorError

Your username is clearly a reflection of your life.

Trump is not fat

Correct, I'm fairly certain at his age and height, he is probably into the "morbidly obese" category.

His supporters really -would- defend anything Trump says, is, or does. No matter how ridiculous that position of support would be. Amazing.