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.

 

MSNBC and Rachel Maddow Getting Sued for 10 Million Dollars

page: 2
64
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:26 PM
link   
You know if people would stop defending their teams propaganda outlet and instead hold reporters accountable when they fudge the truth to make a story more sensational then maybe just maybe we would get actual news again instead of left or right propaganda...

I am certain that's to much to ask god forbid anyone admit their side is propaganda.




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
$10 million? That's a drop in the bucket, more than a fair price for spreading their intentionally divisive propaganda.

Repeat after me guys: "Be emotional and angry! The media said something we don't like. AGAIN! Let's keep giving them the reactionary BS their propaganda was designed for! Let's keep giving them what they want! Thanks xue for continuously providing us with our two minutes of hate!"

Suckers.


Meanwhile not a single person has gone to jail.

"Tick tock... tick tock... tick tock..."

Keep holding your breaths guys! The arrests are coming any day now, I can feel it in my soul!"

Lol.


I can imagine you seething whilst you typed this.


And news flash. We're been divided since nearly this countries inception. Perhaps you should focus your messaging more on encouraging manners and civility in that division.
edit on 9-9-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
You know if people would stop defending their teams propaganda outlet and instead hold reporters accountable when they fudge the truth to make a story more sensational then maybe just maybe we would get actual news again instead of left or right propaganda...

I am certain that's to much to ask god forbid anyone admit their side is propaganda.

People should stop watching all media outlets altogether. Let network news as we know it collapse and let something else take their place.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks like a cable TV outlet is pissed off and is now suing MSNBC and Rachel Maddow for $10 million bucks !!

One America News Network (OANN) has been defamed because MSNBC and Rachel kept saying OANN was a Russian state propaganda outlet !!

Comcast Corporation and NBC Universal are also named in the lawsuit.

Comcast is involved because they refuse to put the OANN channel on their cable systems.

The deliberate MSM lies and censorship are catching up to them and they must PAY !!



OANN's reporters, Kristian Brunovich Rouz, simultaneously works for the Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik; when Rouz runs segments on OANN that relate to Russia, OANN does not disclose that he also works for a Russian state-owned media.[54]

en.wikipedia.org...-Trump_content

I hope you don't work for OANN....


No offense, but this comment is remarkably stupid. If something is an opinion and that media outlet discloses that the opinion maker works for other outlets then that is 100% perfectly legal and honest.



Eh? OAN doesn't disclose is the operative in that statement.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Ok...so it appears they have a right bias...you dont have any issues with CNN or MSNBC or any of the other left leaning media sources...and if they sued because someone defamed them would you be upset with them? I mean aside from FOX News who else is even broadcast thats roght bias?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Ok...so it appears they have a right bias...you dont have any issues with CNN or MSNBC or any of the other left leaning media sources...and if they sued because someone defamed them would you be upset with them? I mean aside from FOX News who else is even broadcast thats roght bias?


Their bias is rather more delicate..IOW, they make things up...all the time, and very consistently in that regime.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

For context

en.m.wikipedia.org...


OANN is known for downplaying threats posed to the United States by Russia. According to a former OANN producer, on his first day at OANN he was told, "Yeah, we like Russia here."[18][53] One of OANN's reporters, Kristian Brunovich Rouz, simultaneously works for the Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik; when Rouz runs segments on OANN that relate to Russia, OANN does not disclose that he also works for a Russian state-owned media.[5



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: RickyD

I can't really say much about MSNBC, since they don't even broadcast it on cable here in Australia. But I do have a few issues with CNN... Don Lemon for example is an idiot and CNN have voluntarily dragged their name though the dirt by allowing an extremists like that to be a political analysts on there network... imo.

But having said that, they're not fake news... they've got a reputation that they take very seriously, so are not spreading blatant lies and left wing conspiracy theories as Trump and his supporters like to claim.

That's the only reason I ever defend them... its all about perspective.

There's a whole world of difference between a news network that is just simply progressively (or conservatively) biased and a 'news source' that is out right fake news.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Well I read through all the sources that seemed pertinent and saw nothing about falsifying reports just a bias as to what is reported on. Also no factual proof they are a Russian propagandist. And by sources I mean those little links in the wiki too...the stuff they sourced their wiki entry from.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

They've been caught just as many times falsifying or purposely misrepresenting something as FOX News has though so clearly they do as do most if not all outlets these days. Infotainment is the name of the game and if you want news now you have to go look at all the reports and dig into what they get it from then use this rare thing most people don't even know of...common sense! And at the end of the day you still won't get the full picture just a better one.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   
After all that it's still a thing one can get sued for...defamation is real and if you don't believe that ask the countless folks and conpanies sued for it so far.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Rachael Maddow is a female?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad



originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
$10 million? That's a drop in the bucket, more than a fair price for spreading their intentionally divisive propaganda.

Repeat after me guys: "Be emotional and angry! The media said something we don't like. AGAIN! Let's keep giving them the reactionary BS their propaganda was designed for! Let's keep giving them what they want! Thanks xue for continuously providing us with our two minutes of hate!"

Suckers.


Meanwhile not a single person has gone to jail.

"Tick tock... tick tock... tick tock..."

Keep holding your breaths guys! The arrests are coming any day now, I can feel it in my soul!"

Lol.


You were the first one to show any emotion or anger in this thread. Good job on calling yourself out.


That one having tantrums is like old faithful. On the hour every hour.
Whenever these people's buddies get caught or exposed, or sued they throw a big fit like this.

We are so used to it here that no one really pays attention anymore, except as entertainment.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
$10 million? That's a drop in the bucket, more than a fair price for spreading their intentionally divisive propaganda.

Repeat after me guys: "Be emotional and angry! The media said something we don't like. AGAIN! Let's keep giving them the reactionary BS their propaganda was designed for! Let's keep giving them what they want! Thanks xue for continuously providing us with our two minutes of hate!"

Suckers.


Meanwhile not a single person has gone to jail.

"Tick tock... tick tock... tick tock..."

Keep holding your breaths guys! The arrests are coming any day now, I can feel it in my soul!"

Lol.


I can imagine you seething whilst you typed this.


And news flash. We're been divided since nearly this countries inception. Perhaps you should focus your messaging more on encouraging manners and civility in that division.


History is fun.

Until the early 1800's it was the Democratic-Republic party against the Whigs.

Once the Whigs were destroyed politically the party eventually splintered in to Democrats and Republicans because they had no common enemy so became their own.

Progressivism found it's way into the Democratic Party in 1913.

The last real Liberal in the Democratic party was assassinated in 1963.

Progressives eventually consumed the Democratic party and expanded into the Republican party as well.

Now the Democratic Socialists (technically Communists) are fighting to take control of the Democratic party by getting rid of the moderate Progressives, Conservatives are trying to take back their party from Republican Progressives (RINOs) and voters are stuck on the sidelines, for the most part.

Yea... this didn't happen with Bush, Obama or Trump.

It's been a long time coming.




edit on 9-9-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Rachael Maddow is a female?


It self-identifies as one.

That counts now.




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

right wing conspiracy theory like the Fake Russian collusion?? hahaha busted



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
You know if people would stop defending their teams propaganda outlet and instead hold reporters accountable when they fudge the truth to make a story more sensational then maybe just maybe we would get actual news again instead of left or right propaganda...

I am certain that's to much to ask god forbid anyone admit their side is propaganda.


I don't trust the government to regulate, not after they made domestic propaganda legal again.

The citizens have to stop watching it. We don't get old news back as long as the monopoly on punditry makes money. And a vast majority of the media is punditry.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:22 PM
link   
So I guess the court will decide if OANN is a filthy Russian propaganda outlet meant to subvert our elections and stab turtles.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

10 Mil . ? Looks like She/He/It is gonna " Go Down " Out of Necessity to Cover that Chunk of Change ..........



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: xuenchen

For context

en.m.wikipedia.org...


OANN is known for downplaying threats posed to the United States by Russia. According to a former OANN producer, on his first day at OANN he was told, "Yeah, we like Russia here."[18][53] One of OANN's reporters, Kristian Brunovich Rouz, simultaneously works for the Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik; when Rouz runs segments on OANN that relate to Russia, OANN does not disclose that he also works for a Russian state-owned media.[5
For context

Don't trust Wikipedia, EVER. Any educated and credentialed user knows this.

www.findingdulcinea.com...



.  The contributor with an agenda often prevails.
In theory, the intellectual sparring at the heart of Wikipedia's group editing process results in a consensus that removes unreliable contributions and edits. But often the contributor who “wins” is not the one with the soundest information, but rather the one with the strongest agenda.

In March 2009, Irish student Shane Fitzgerald, who was conducting research on the Internet and globalization of information, posted a fake quotation on the Wikipedia article about recently deceased French composer Maurice Jarre. Due to the fact that the quote was not attributed to a reliable source, it was removed several times by editors, but Fitzgerald continued re-posting it until it was allowed to remain.

Fitzgerald was startled to learn that several major newspapers picked up the quote and published it in obituaries, confirming his suspicions of the questionable ways in which journalists use Web sites, and Wikipedia, as a reliable source. Fitzgerald e-mailed the newspapers letting them know that the quote was fabricated; he believes that otherwise, they might never have found out.

7. Individuals with agendas sometimes have significant editing authority.
Administrators on Wikipedia have the power to delete or disallow comments or articles they disagree with and support the viewpoints they approve. For example, beginning in 2003, U.K. scientist William Connolley became a Web site administrator and subsequently wrote or rewrote more than 5,000 Wikipedia articles supporting the concept of climate change and global warming. More importantly, he used his authority to ban more than 2,000 contributors with opposing viewpoints from making further contributions.

According to The Financial Post, when Connolley was through editing, “The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy.” Connolley has since been stripped of authority at Wikipedia, but one blogger believes he continues to post.

Furthermore, in 2007, a new program called WikiScanner uncovered individuals with a clear conflict of interest that had written or edited some Wikipedia entries. Employees from organizations such as the CIA, the Democratic National Party and Diebold were editing Wikipedia entries in their employers' favor


edit on 9-9-2019 by Arnie123 because: Truth



new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join