-
@Frank said in US Election Thread 2016:
Wikileaks' material is gold because it is an original source without a slant being placed on it by some journalist.
Bias vs agenda?
I see Madonna has offered BJs to males that vote for Hilary....
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11732422
-
@taniwharugby I think she's still quite popular with the male Hispanic community
-
@canefan said in US Election Thread 2016:
@Duluth I would imagine he should get a slightly sympathetic reception from a guy that works for a right leaning news network. Perhaps his first question won't concern his treatment of women
Why should his first question be about his treatment of women?
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback It shouldn't, but IIRC that was the first question of the last debate (or the first one?)
-
@canefan said in US Election Thread 2016:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback It shouldn't, but IIRC that was the first question of the last debate (or the first one?)
I am struggling with what you are getting at. Not asking him about his treatment does or not not indicate a sympathetic moderator?
-
@canefan said in US Election Thread 2016:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback It shouldn't, but IIRC that was the first question of the last debate (or the first one?)
I'm confused. So the last moderator was unfair?
How does that make Chris Wallace friendly?
-
@Catogrande said in US Election Thread 2016:
@Frank said in US Election Thread 2016:
Wikileaks' material is gold because it is an original source without a slant being placed on it by some journalist.
You forgot the fishing emoji
Sorry. Gold when liberals used it for their agenda against Bush and co., but a terribly biased Russian inspired source when used against liberals.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Election Thread 2016:
@phoenetia
There is not really any such thing as 'reputable' press. CNN is just bloody hopeless for example, yet many consider them main stream.
Reputable is incredibly subjective. For example I bet we have very different opinions on which news outlets are reputable.And since when does Herald validate or corroborate a story??? They make stuff up and regurgitate left wing propaganda on a daily basis. Maybe it was the shock value of them doing for a right wing article that got you by surprise?
Theres no definitive measure by which to say one outlet is reputable, its relative imo which is why there's typically no one go to source for any news. Some are more reputable than others for example, WSJ has a considerably better reputation for credibility and newsworthiness than Huff Post, Mother Jones, Slate etc.
There was no surprise of the kind you suggest - as I said, it was in line with my "Very poor" expectations of NZHerald which sounds not too dissimilar to your own.
-
-
I am seriously considering just outsourcing most of my thoughts on this election to Dave Rubin.
US Politics