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.

 

The Source of the Political Divide is Not The President

page: 6
79
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



You appealed to hypocrisy to divert attention away from the argument back on me.


No. I refuted your argument with logic. Just as Trump cannot force people to become divided, neither can the media. Very basic and easy to understand. One you even agreed with, eventually.

Then I used your past threads and posts to show how you hold/held similar beliefs but are now taking a different position. Hypocrisy.



Ad hominem and red herrings is all you have to promote your so-called "debate skills".


At no point did I "promote" my own debate skills. Not sure what you are even talking about.

Is this another one of your dishonest tactics in an attempt to deflect from the lack of logic in your assertions? Seems to be a pattern emerging.



And as you usual, you run as soon as you realize your own irrationality.


Another dishonest tactic. I cannot stay on ATS all of the time to babysit people such as yourself. I have other things to do as well.

I know you like the attention, but you have to learn to be patient and wait till I can log back on.
edit on 24-1-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




No. I refuted your argument with logic. Just as Trump cannot force people to become divided, neither can the media. Very basic and easy to understand. One you even agreed with, eventually.


You agreed with my argument. You refuted nothing. Your traipsing into irrelevant appeals to hypocrisy were and still are irrelevant diversionary tactics. You blamed me for making claims I didn't make. You contort, quote-mine and selectively cherry-pick things I've written to suit your little red herrings, all after you've admitted to agreeing. Then you say we need more examples of threads like this as examples of lazy debating skills, which are standards you would never hold to yourself. Complete nonsense.

Like you said, you have things to do, I'm wasting your time, yet here you are.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



You agreed with my argument. You refuted nothing.


I agree that Trump is not responsible for division. What I refuted is your assertion in regards to the media being responsible and you eventually agreed with that. Which makes one question what the point of your thread was at all.



Your traipsing into irrelevant appeals to hypocrisy were and still are irrelevant diversionary tactics


What needs to be diverted from? The logic in your OP is easily refuted.

Showing how you have held similar beliefs in other circumstances is just the icing on the cake.



You blamed me for making claims I didn't make. You contort, quote-mine and selectively cherry-pick things I've written to suit your little red herrings, all after you've admitted to agreeing.


I've agreed to a certain aspect(s). Now that is what you call cherry-picking. You've also admitted that the media is not responsible for the division, which makes you OP pretty much moot.



Then you say we need more examples of threads like this as examples of lazy debating skills, which are standards you would never hold to yourself. Complete nonsense.


I stand by that. You are a lazy debater, resorting to tactics a child would laugh at and logic deserving of a chuckle as well.



Like you said, you have things to do, I'm wasting your time, yet here you are.


I'm sure you wish I would just go away. Makes it easier for you to get the confirmation bias slaps on the back you were looking for.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




I agree that Trump is not responsible for division. What I refuted is your assertion in regards to the media being responsible and you eventually agreed with that. Which makes one question what the point of your thread was at all.


I don't mind clarifying.

I never asserted the media was responsible for dividing the country, only that Trump's theory is more accurate and far less superstitious, which it is. The media's task is to inform, not misinform.

The point of the thread is that Trump is not the source of the division despite the media's claims. And the media, in blaming Trump, have done so by completely removing themselves from the equation. They do not blame themselves, and in fact, promote the opposite, despite their contribution to a "post-truth" political climate, and despite the growing mistrust and decline of journalism.

As for your digs, all of it padded by your own fallacy, I simply do not respect your contributions—I suspect them. They reek of group-think, propaganda and self-aggrandizement.


edit on 24-1-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



I never asserted the media was responsible for dividing the country, only that Trump's theory is more accurate and far less superstitious, which it is. The media's task is to inform, not misinform.


Incorrect. The media's task is to use their free speech in a manner they find suitable. It is not their task or responsibility to inform people. That responsibility is on the backs of the people, as is the choice to become divided. That is where your argument fails and I have shown examples in the past in which you have agreed with such sentiments.

The same argument you are making in regards to the media, misinformation, etc, could also be leveled at Trump and his people as well. The only thing up for debate is the levels at which they do such things.

It does appear that your OP was trying to make the case that the media is responsible for the division. You did say Trump was accurate.



The point of the thread is that Trump is not the source of the division despite the media's claims.And the media, in blaming Trump, have done so by completely removing themselves from the equation. They do not blame themselves, and in fact, promote the opposite, despite their contribution to a "post-truth" political climate, and despite the growing mistrust and decline of journalism.


So you are asserting the media is responsible for the division in this country.



As for your digs, all of it padded by your own fallacy, I simply do not respect your contributions—I suspect them.


I am not concerned one bit about what you do or do not respect or suspect.



They reek of group-think, propaganda and self-aggrandizement.


And this is why I do not care. I've said nothing that could be considered "group-think". So it appears you are giving your ass its own set of vocal chords.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You’re right. I meant the journalist’s task is to inform. I used too broad a term.


The same argument you are making in regards to the media, misinformation, etc, could also be leveled at Trump and his people as well. The only thing up for debate is the levels at which they do such things.


Except “Trump and his people” are not tasked with informing the public.
edit on 24-1-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

You’re right. I meant the journalist’s task is to inform. I used too broad a term.


The same argument you are making in regards to the media, misinformation, etc, could also be leveled at Trump and his people as well. The only thing up for debate is the levels at which they do such things.


Except “Trump and his people” are not tasked with informing the public.


It is not the task of the media, the journalist or anyone else to inform others. That is the burden of the individual to inform themselves.

The journalist is employed to do the bidding of the person that owns their own press.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

You’re right. I meant the journalist’s task is to inform. I used too broad a term.


The same argument you are making in regards to the media, misinformation, etc, could also be leveled at Trump and his people as well. The only thing up for debate is the levels at which they do such things.


Except “Trump and his people” are not tasked with informing the public.


It is not the task of the media, the journalist or anyone else to inform others. That is the burden of the individual to inform themselves.

The journalist is employed to do the bidding of the person that owns their own press.


That sounds pretty cynical. Journalists have a code of ethics, a professional responsibility, to inform the public.

The president doesn't share that responsibility, so I'm not sure why we'd hold him to the same standards as professional journalists.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


It is not the task of the media, the journalist or anyone else to inform others.


Actually, that is the primary duty of the journalist: to inform the public.


The journalist is employed to do the bidding of the person that owns their own press.


The bidding of the press owners is part of the problem. Nevertheless, the fundamental duty of the press/journalists is to inform.

edit on 24-1-2018 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

You’re right. I meant the journalist’s task is to inform. I used too broad a term.


The same argument you are making in regards to the media, misinformation, etc, could also be leveled at Trump and his people as well. The only thing up for debate is the levels at which they do such things.


Except “Trump and his people” are not tasked with informing the public.


It is not the task of the media, the journalist or anyone else to inform others. That is the burden of the individual to inform themselves.

The journalist is employed to do the bidding of the person that owns their own press.


That sounds pretty cynical. Journalists have a code of ethics, a professional responsibility, to inform the public.

The president doesn't share that responsibility, so I'm not sure why we'd hold him to the same standards as professional journalists.


I'm not holding journalists to any standard whatsoever. I said it is the responsibility of the individual to inform themselves.

So I'm not sure why you have a problem with me not holding the president to any standard at all in that regard.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence



Actually, that is the primary duty of the journalist: to inform the public.


Incorrect. The duty of the journalist is to produce a product they are asked to produce by the people that own their own free press. The people are informed on or by that product according how the people who own the press want them to be informed.

Whether it's factually correct or in proper context is another matter altogether.



The bidding of the press owners is part of the problem. Nevertheless, the fundamental duty of the press/journalists is to inform.


See above.

The duty to inform is the responsibility of the individual.

What you and Les Mis are talking about is what leads to misinformation and ignorance because it gives people the false notion that they do not have to think for themselves.
edit on 24-1-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


Incorrect. The duty of the journalist is to produce a product they are asked to produce by the people that own their own free press. The people are informed on or by that product.


Incorrect. The duty of the journalist is to inform, hence the importance of the free press versus a state controlled media. Yes, people (rightly) make their own decisions and choose what they read based upon the available information, but the duty of the press is to inform and give them the information which the people may or may not choose to read and/or believe.


The duty to inform is the responsibility of the individual.


Via the free press and their duty to inform by providing information.

See above.


What you and Les Mis are talking about is what leads to misinformation and ignorance because it gives people the false notion that they do not have to think for themselves.


I agreed with your arguments in this thread, and rarely agree with LM, until you said the duty of journalists is not to inform the public, since that is patently incorrect.

I see your point, though.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




I'm not holding journalists to any standard whatsoever. I said it is the responsibility of the individual to inform themselves.


I understand what you mean, but the journalist is obligated to abide by his ethical code and provide accurate and objective information regarding current events, and there are many reasons why this is an established aspect of free, democratic societies.



So I'm not sure why you have a problem with me not holding the president to any standard at all in that regard.


Because the job of a president is different than that of a journalist.
edit on 24-1-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The fact, that two people in this thread actually debate the duty of a free press (which shouldn't be up to debate at all), is the living evidence to debunk your premise of this thread with.

Divisive rhetorics surrounding "the evil MSM" is precisely Big Mac Dons reward for "inventing" fake news.

And if you can't see the efforts to delegitimize the free press, you simply dont want to see them. Which is probably why you PR drones are a real piece of boring legwork, I'll give you that.
Good luck swaying the public opinion with a sack of lies, sophistry and distractions... again, I guess?



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion




The fact, that two people in this thread actually debate the duty of a free press (which shouldn't be up to debate at all), is the living evidence to debunk your premise of this thread with.

Divisive rhetorics surrounding "the evil MSM" is precisely Big Mac Dons reward for "inventing" fake news.

And if you can't see the efforts to delegitimize the free press, you simply dont want to see them. Which is probably why you PR drones are a real piece of boring legwork, I'll give you that.
Good luck swaying the public opinion with a sack of lies, sophistry and distractions... again, I guess?



Ooh, "divisive rhetoric", another superstitious bogeyman. Let me guess, the "divisive rhetoric" flies through the air and slaps the media around a bit? What else can you blame on super Trump's magic words?



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence



Incorrect. The duty of the journalist is to inform, hence the importance of the free press versus a state controlled media.


The right to a free press is the right of individuals. Those individuals get to spread whatever message they want with their constitutional right. The journalist is paid to spread their message. That does not mean that message is factual, which is in the definition of inform.

They are not paid to necessarily inform. Journalists are paid to do what they are told.



Via the free press and their duty to inform by providing information.


People will inform themselves in any way they choose. The press is only one avenue and that does not mean it will be factual.

Journalistic ethics sounds good on the surface, but they are at the mercy of the opinions or desires of the people that own that free press.



I agreed with your arguments in this thread, and rarely agree with LM, until you said the duty of journalists is not to inform the public, since that is patently incorrect.


Their duty is to do as they are told. Plain and simple.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



I understand what you mean, but the journalist is obligated to abide by his ethical code and provide accurate and objective information regarding current events, and there are many reasons why this is an established aspect of free, democratic societies.


Obligated by what? As far as I know, they are only obligated to the contracts they sign when they go to work.



Because the job of a president is different than that of a journalist.


Perhaps you did not read what I posted.

I said I am not holding the president to any standard in that regard. So I'm not sure how his job being different is relevant to what I said.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

How many journalists have been unlawfully detained last year and how many have been killed in action last year? A guess would suffice, just curious.

The media is more than Rupert Murdouche, ya know. The guy that waged open war against Obama with this birth certificate muslim sleeper nonsense. Blind on the right eye again? Surprise!

But I digress. Trump hasn't only magic words, he has the best words. All of them. The best magic words as well! Like... fake news! It's soooo good that he actually had to invent it, cuz he wasn't aware that it already existed in the first place. Only the best words go all the way to the orange tounge, even the ones non-existent in other bodily parts. That's 4th dimensional dips into the collective consciousness right there! 4D chess was yesterday, we are beyond merely touching magic globes at this point. Or should I say... above?

Hail your healer (who has to kill his patient first)!



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Obligated by what? As far as I know, they are only obligated to the contracts they sign when they go to work.


By the ethical codes of their own organizations.



posted on Jan, 24 2018 @ 06:54 PM
link   




top topics



 
79
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join