Quote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.
Quote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.
Quote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.
Quote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.
First off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:46:13 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.If you're going to compare two news sources, you have to compare the facts themselves, or else what's the point? We can't have some invisible boundary that's like 'let's look at these separately and give them equal negative value' because that's dishonest.
Quote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:49:10 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:46:13 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.If you're going to compare two news sources, you have to compare the facts themselves, or else what's the point? We can't have some invisible boundary that's like 'let's look at these separately and give them equal negative value' because that's dishonest.Exactly.Which is why I linked multiple controversies for MSNBC whereas you linked one for Breitbart. If you'd like to find a different way to quantify Breitbart and MSNBC's bias then you're more than welcome to try.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:55:40 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:49:10 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:46:13 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.If you're going to compare two news sources, you have to compare the facts themselves, or else what's the point? We can't have some invisible boundary that's like 'let's look at these separately and give them equal negative value' because that's dishonest.Exactly.Which is why I linked multiple controversies for MSNBC whereas you linked one for Breitbart. If you'd like to find a different way to quantify Breitbart and MSNBC's bias then you're more than welcome to try.Well, Breitbart has a few but there's not as many. I guess when you're not a 24/7 news channel, there's a lot less that can go wrong >.>Although I feel like generally, MSNBC tries to pretend that it's more neutral than it really is. Breitbart.com has never pretended to not be biased, I don't think.
Quote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:59:58 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:55:40 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:49:10 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:46:13 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.If you're going to compare two news sources, you have to compare the facts themselves, or else what's the point? We can't have some invisible boundary that's like 'let's look at these separately and give them equal negative value' because that's dishonest.Exactly.Which is why I linked multiple controversies for MSNBC whereas you linked one for Breitbart. If you'd like to find a different way to quantify Breitbart and MSNBC's bias then you're more than welcome to try.Well, Breitbart has a few but there's not as many. I guess when you're not a 24/7 news channel, there's a lot less that can go wrong >.>Although I feel like generally, MSNBC tries to pretend that it's more neutral than it really is. Breitbart.com has never pretended to not be biased, I don't think.All the more evidence as to why MSNBC is shit tier.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 01:09:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:59:58 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:55:40 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:49:10 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:46:13 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:43:25 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:41:52 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:38:48 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 12:35:18 PMQuote from: Kupo on January 20, 2015, 12:28:59 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 11:28:13 AMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:11:02 AMFirst off, allow me to take a moment to laugh at linking "Breitbart"It is pretty hilarious considering you've linked MSNBC and HuffPost innumerable times in the past.Breitbart.com is objectively worse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversiesYeah I don't know about that.MSNBC was also the news outlet that had the cumnugget Matt Binder on air and took everything he had to say as the gospel truth and refused to give any credence to gamergate arguments. Top notch journalistic practices right there.Not being open to debate on Gamergate is hardly as bad as believing in a fictional terrorist organization. You have failed your readers if you refuse to acknowledge utter falsehoods.Actually taking everything in such a black and white manner is the antithesis of good journalism. Reputable journalism is supposed to analyze, investigate and consider two sides of the argument in an egalitarian manner. That's why I respect David Pakman on his reporting on Gamergate despite him being relatively left leaning. He remains non partisan and neutral.Not sure why you're trying to compare Gamergate with ISIS anyway.Because you did.No I brought up an example of poor journalistic practices within MSNBC and multiple major discrepancies within their reports to bring attention to the fact that they're just as bad, if not perhaps worse, than Breitbart.It was you that conflated the two together, actually.If you're going to compare two news sources, you have to compare the facts themselves, or else what's the point? We can't have some invisible boundary that's like 'let's look at these separately and give them equal negative value' because that's dishonest.Exactly.Which is why I linked multiple controversies for MSNBC whereas you linked one for Breitbart. If you'd like to find a different way to quantify Breitbart and MSNBC's bias then you're more than welcome to try.Well, Breitbart has a few but there's not as many. I guess when you're not a 24/7 news channel, there's a lot less that can go wrong >.>Although I feel like generally, MSNBC tries to pretend that it's more neutral than it really is. Breitbart.com has never pretended to not be biased, I don't think.All the more evidence as to why MSNBC is shit tier.Not really, but this argument has become pointless.
You have no problem attacking Breitbart but are completely comfortable to defend MSNBC. Your bias is showing.
The Breitbart article proceedings to do what every great source (Including MSNBC, Fox News, etc) does with interview, and pick five sentences and leave the rest
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 01:21:24 PMYou have no problem attacking Breitbart but are completely comfortable to defend MSNBC. Your bias is showing.Quote The Breitbart article proceedings to do what every great source (Including MSNBC, Fox News, etc) does with interview, and pick five sentences and leave the restI am not defending MSNBC - which is a bad source (And yes I have used it before, along with also using Fox News - if the article is the only one available). Whether or not you feel it is bad as Breitbart is up to you.
Breitbart is objectively shit, but that doesn't mean you ignore everything they say. Milo has been better than a lot of other mainstream journos on gg. The trick with biased outlets is sifting through the garbage. As far as the actual topic goes. I'm sure if we just ignore ISIS they'll go away. /s
Quote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:24:39 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 01:21:24 PMYou have no problem attacking Breitbart but are completely comfortable to defend MSNBC. Your bias is showing.Quote The Breitbart article proceedings to do what every great source (Including MSNBC, Fox News, etc) does with interview, and pick five sentences and leave the restI am not defending MSNBC - which is a bad source (And yes I have used it before, along with also using Fox News - if the article is the only one available). Whether or not you feel it is bad as Breitbart is up to you.Considering the amount of controversies and debacles MSNBC has under its wing compared to Breitbart, I think it's pretty evident which is the worst news outlet.
Quote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 01:48:12 PMQuote from: Icy on January 20, 2015, 01:24:39 PMQuote from: Madman Mordo on January 20, 2015, 01:21:24 PMYou have no problem attacking Breitbart but are completely comfortable to defend MSNBC. Your bias is showing.Quote The Breitbart article proceedings to do what every great source (Including MSNBC, Fox News, etc) does with interview, and pick five sentences and leave the restI am not defending MSNBC - which is a bad source (And yes I have used it before, along with also using Fox News - if the article is the only one available). Whether or not you feel it is bad as Breitbart is up to you.Considering the amount of controversies and debacles MSNBC has under its wing compared to Breitbart, I think it's pretty evident which is the worst news outlet.And as Kupo said, one is a 24 hour news channel that has been around far longer than Breitbart.But if we're going by the amount of controversies and debacles to determine how good a source is, The Huff Post is apparently quite good and clean.
ISIS talks of religious genocide, killing "hundreds of millions"
