[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-04, 18:42, said:

Typical left fringe nonsense; think left wing sites are mainstream.

The ultra right fringe has moved so far to the right that even moderate and centrist viewpoints seem to have become left wing. "Papers" like the Washington Post and NY Times are the standard when it comes to journalism in this country.

Some people just "can't handle the truth".

[Daniel1960]

johnu, on 2018-September-04, 20:00, said:

The ultra right fringe has moved so far to the right that even moderate and centrist viewpoints seem to have become left wing. "Papers" like the Washington Post and NY Times are the standard when it comes to journalism in this country.

Some people just "can't handle the truth".

Just because they are standards, does not mean they are not left wing. The Wall St Journal is a standard also, but that does not make it moderate or centrist. Is your quote self-reflective.

[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-04, 20:15, said:

Just because they are standards, does not mean they are not left wing. The Wall St Journal is a standard also, but that does not make it moderate or centrist. Is your quote self-reflective.

No, but just because they aren't ultra right fringe doesn't make them left wing. The WS Journal editorials are (ultra) right fringe and the rest of the paper is centrist so it has a split personality. If you exclude the right fringe editorials, the WS Journal is rated at centrist.

Media Bias Factcheck rates different news sites.

Washington Post and New York Times are rated as Left-Center Bias. I imagine that when you are doing major investigative pieces about Dennison related scandals and law breaking that your mix of stories will fall left of center. Fox Propaganda is rated as Right Bias which is further right than Right-Center Bias. Breitbart is rated under Questionable Sources. Anything rated toward the middle can be considered moderate by definition. As you get further right or left, you are less moderate.

Somehow I find it not surprising that you have such a high regard for Breitbart.

[kenberg]

I got a slow start this morning, now it is 87 degrees and sunny, and I still need to go out and pick the raspberries. The polar bears will have to fend for themselves, I have a real crisis here.

I haven't made a totally absurd comment for a while (or so I claim) so I thought I was due.

[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2018-September-05, 09:33, said:

I haven't made a totally absurd comment for a while (or so I claim) so I thought I was due.

Not to worry - there has been lots of cover for you in that aspect.

(Ex: New York Times and Breitbart are equivalent news sources)

[Daniel1960]

johnu, on 2018-September-04, 20:53, said:

No, but just because they aren't ultra right fringe doesn't make them left wing. The WS Journal editorials are (ultra) right fringe and the rest of the paper is centrist so it has a split personality. If you exclude the right fringe editorials, the WS Journal is rated at centrist.

Media Bias Factcheck rates different news sites.

Washington Post and New York Times are rated as Left-Center Bias. I imagine that when you are doing major investigative pieces about Dennison related scandals and law breaking that your mix of stories will fall left of center. Fox Propaganda is rated as Right Bias which is further right than Right-Center Bias. Breitbart is rated under Questionable Sources. Anything rated toward the middle can be considered moderate by definition. As you get further right or left, you are less moderate.

Somehow I find it not surprising that you have such a high regard for Breitbart.

Other sources rate FOX news as just as right-biased as the Times and Post are left-biased.

https://guides.lib.u...37508&p=4462444

The other way to look at them is how the political sides view each source. The Times and Post are trusted by the left, but distrusted by the right. Conversely, Fox News is trusted by the right, but distrusted by the left. Interestingly, those in the middle trust all three. Breitbart, the Blade, and The Drudge Report are less trusted by the middle, as are the Huffington Post, Mother Jones and Politico.

http://www.journalis...olarization-01/

I do not know how you can utter high regard and Breitbart in the same sentence. Maybe it is just another of your crazy ideas. Perhaps you have just as high regard as Politico.

[Daniel1960]

Winstonm, on 2018-September-05, 09:36, said:

Not to worry - there has been lots of cover for you in that aspect.

(Ex: New York Times and Breitbart are equivalent news sources)

Yeah, well johnu seems to have high respect for Breitbart. The rest of us tend to disregard its stories.

[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-05, 10:59, said:

I do not know how you can utter high regard and Breitbart in the same sentence.

Hmmm, you seem to have caught Dennison's dementia or you have forgot again that things you post on the internet can be looked up and retrieved.

You are the one who equated Breitbart with the NY Times, Washington Post (and Fox).

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-04, 09:32, said:

Which is probably the main reason that people should not believe propaganda, especially articles appearing in the Guardian, on FOX News, NPR, Breitbart, The Times, Post, Blaze, etc.

[Daniel1960]

johnu, on 2018-September-05, 13:17, said:

Hmmm, you seem to have caught Dennison's dementia or you have forgot again that things you post on the internet can be looked up and retrieved.

You are the one who equated Breitbart with the NY Times, Washington Post (and Fox).

So you think the mere mention of the two in the same sentences translates into equating them to one another? That certainly explains a lot.

[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-05, 13:50, said:

So you think the mere mention of the two in the same sentences translates into equating them to one another? That certainly explains a lot.

[Winstonm]

Just for the sake of sanity: "people should not believe propaganda, especially articles appearing in the Guardian, on FOX News, NPR, Breitbart, The Times, Post, Blaze, etc" is a statement of equivalency.

Johnu did not make this statement. If the shoe fits, you're missing a shoe.

[Daniel1960]

Winstonm, on 2018-September-05, 14:11, said:

Just for the sake of sanity: "people should not believe propaganda, especially articles appearing in the Guardian, on FOX News, NPR, Breitbart, The Times, Post, Blaze, etc" is a statement of equivalency.

Johnu did not make this statement. If the shoe fits, you're missing a shoe.

If you think that comparing the political slants of those outlets is the same as equivalency, then so be it. Personally, I think it is a stretch, but people tend believe stretches in their favor, and disregard those against. Just like Johnu think that papers supporting his viewpoint are mainstream. Readers of the aforementioned papers probably feel the same. People like to think they are mainstream, rather than wingers.

[hrothgar]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-05, 15:19, said:

If you think that comparing the political slants of those outlets is the same as equivalency, then so be it. Personally, I think it is a stretch, but people tend believe stretches in their favor, and disregard those against. Just like Johnu think that papers supporting his viewpoint are mainstream. Readers of the aforementioned papers probably feel the same. People like to think they are mainstream, rather than wingers.

Google the expression "Newspaper of Record"
See what shows up.

Sure as hell ain't Breitbart

[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-September-05, 15:19, said:

If you think that comparing the political slants of those outlets is the same as equivalency, then so be it.

[Winstonm]

My guess is that Richard's suggestion will not penetrate the haze, so I took it upon myself to find this.

Quote

The United States is considered by some to have at least four national newspapers of record:

The New York Times
The Wall Street Journal
The Los Angeles Times
The Washington Post

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2018-September-05, 17:29, said:

My guess is that Richard's suggestion will not penetrate the haze, so I took it upon myself to find this.

This does change over time though and which ones are credible don't always get updated.

In the UK, the Guardian has degenerated from a left of centre newspaper of record to a pretty horrible rag that produces "An unnamed unverifiable source says the Conservative government eats babies" type stories. These lists are not static.

The UK press is in a pretty horrible state. To me the Times and the Independent are the only ones left really, the Sun, Mail, Express on the right and Mirror and Guardian on the left are a joke, the Telegraph is fairly well to the right but borderline.

[Winstonm]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-05, 18:00, said:

This does change over time though and which ones are credible don't always get updated.

In the UK, the Guardian has degenerated from a left of centre newspaper of record to a pretty horrible rag that produces "An unnamed unverifiable source says the Conservative government eats babies" type stories. These lists are not static.

The UK press is in a pretty horrible state. To me the Times and the Independent are the only ones left really, the Sun, Mail, Express on the right and Mirror and Guardian on the left are a joke, the Telegraph is fairly well to the right but borderline.

If you had read the linked article, it says pretty much the same thing - and it points out that not even the best is immune from errors, sometimes quite dramatic errors such as the NYT coverage of the intelligence concerning the Iraq war buildup.

[johnu]

Daniel1960, on 2018-August-29, 05:23, said:

When it comes down to science vs propaganda, I prefer the science side.

Speaking of science related things, there was this about the global warming denier commander in chief

Hannity Guest: Science Proves Dennison Is The ‘Most Sound-Minded’ President Ever

If Dennison really is a stable genius, I may have to rethink my support of global warming.

[Al_U_Card]

johnu, on 2018-September-06, 03:20, said:

Speaking of science related things, there was this about the global warming denier commander in chief

Hannity Guest: Science Proves Dennison Is The ‘Most Sound-Minded’ President Ever

If Dennison really is a stable genius, I may have to rethink my support of global warming.

He is smarter than a horse? (Or more like a part of their anatomy...lol). Rethinking is good, especially when you look at the data and see that reality is not a computer model.

[y66]

I just got in from walking my dog. It's 9:48 PM EDT and quite dark. Also, somewhat cooler than this afternoon. We passed a neighbor who was gardening in her front yard. That was a first.