Sign in to follow this  
deicer

Why You Need Trusted News Sources

Recommended Posts

I'd never say there is no news on CNN but the problem is that they are actually malicious and not just incompetent in their reporting.  Getting something wrong might be excusable but intentionally misrepresenting the facts to drive a narrative is not.  How many times does someone have to lie to you before you lose trust in them forever - once, twice, 8 times?  Below is an example from last year - anything and everything and forever that comes from CNN is a lie.  Now, I know others are also lying to me too - they are ignored or sandboxed subject to independent verification.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/business/media/fox-news-analyst-ralph-peters.html

A longtime analyst for Fox News is leaving the network, saying that he could not “in good conscience” remain with an organization that, he argued, “is now wittingly harming our system of government for profit.”

In a searing farewell note sent to colleagues on Tuesday, Ralph Peters, a Fox News strategic analyst and a retired lieutenant colonel in the United States Army, castigated the network for its coverage of President Trump and the rhetoric of its prime-time hosts.

“In my view, Fox has degenerated from providing a legitimate and much-needed outlet for conservative voices to a mere propaganda machine for a destructive and ethically ruinous administration,” Colonel Peters wrote in his message, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times.

“Over my decade with Fox, I long was proud of the association,” he added. “Now I am ashamed.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see these comparisons as an example of how and why our collective decent continues. It draws its strength from the fallacy of proportion which has now become the holy grail of perspective.

As long as something is perceived as worse than something else, something else must be considered OK. This applies across the board to almost any subject you can think of and results in a long slope downward. Just add some snow and a toboggan (external forces and fake news) and you create extremes. We have become sooooooo easy as a result, no need for Russians, at least no challenge for them.

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because something is worse does not mean something else is OK.

As I was taught by a very wise man a long time ago, what we have been experiencing through Fox et al is the "normalisation of deviation".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what, the man is an obvious left winger that's leaving his post to enjoin with people that share his viewpoint, which is a boring and completely not-newsworthy story unless of course you can see the big picture ramifications of this sort of thing?

There's a lawyer in California btw that has started a real estate company that initially catered to right wing types that wanted relocate out of State to almost anywhere they could live with people that shared a similar political perspective.

Now he's added lefties to the program and they too are being relocated to residential areas better suited to their utopian dream.

Maybe you could get a tent Deicer, get ahead of the rush of democrats and liberals and find a good camp site to retire to in climate friendly California where you could live among other 'progressives' that have pursued their agenda and apparently got what they were seeking?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DEFCON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your anti Trump obsession is almost psychopathic in scale & scope Deicer.

It's clear that you aren't a capitalist, a conservative, a supporter of Western culture, or even a modern liberal.

So if you don't mind, I'd appreciate your taking a moment to answer a question.

What form of political ideology would you prefer to see emerge from the ashes of Western culture?

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely this is a joke? Satire Site ??

 

FAA Publishes New Phonetic Alphabet

 

For Immediate Release

December 31, 2018

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today published the much anticipated update to the phonetic radio alphabet. With English as the official language of aviation, the updated alphabet is meant to encourage easier global communications.

“This state-of-the-art enhancement will improve flight safety and increase efficiency with regard to radio communications,” said FAA Assistant Administrator Bailey Edwards .

The new alphabet will go into effect on 01 JULY 2019 as follows:

  • A – Aisle
  • B – Bdellium
  • C – Czar
  • D – Django
  • E – Eye
  • F – Foxtrot
  • G – Gnat
  • H – Hour
  • I – Inside
  • J – Jalapeno
  • K – Knight
  • L – Lima
  • M – Mnemonic
  • N – Nancy
  • O – Oedipus
  • P – Pterodactyl
  • Q – Quran
  • R – Romeo
  • S – Sierra
  • T – Tsunami
  • U – Uniform
  • V – Victor
  • W – Wreath
  • X – Xylophone
  • Y – Yankee
  • Z – Zulu

http://aviationdaily.news/2019/01/09/faa-publishes-new-phonetic-alphabet/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Surely this is a joke? Satire Site ??

 

FAA Publishes New Phonetic Alphabet

 

For Immediate Release

December 31, 2018

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today published the much anticipated update to the phonetic radio alphabet. With English as the official language of aviation, the updated alphabet is meant to encourage easier global communications.

“This state-of-the-art enhancement will improve flight safety and increase efficiency with regard to radio communications,” said FAA Assistant Administrator Bailey Edwards .

The new alphabet will go into effect on 01 JULY 2019 as follows:

  • A – Aisle
  • B – Bdellium
  • C – Czar
  • D – Django
  • E – Eye
  • F – Foxtrot
  • G – Gnat
  • H – Hour
  • I – Inside
  • J – Jalapeno
  • K – Knight
  • L – Lima
  • M – Mnemonic
  • N – Nancy
  • O – Oedipus
  • P – Pterodactyl
  • Q – Quran
  • R – Romeo
  • S – Sierra
  • T – Tsunami
  • U – Uniform
  • V – Victor
  • W – Wreath
  • X – Xylophone
  • Y – Yankee
  • Z – Zulu

http://aviationdaily.news/2019/01/09/faa-publishes-new-phonetic-alphabet/

Looks like more fake news to me.  The NATO version still rules: https://www.aircharterservice.ca/about-us/news-features/blog/a-look-at-the-history-of-the-nato-phonetic-alphabet

Character Telephony Phonic (Pronunciation)
A Alpha Al-fah
B Bravo Brah-voh
C Charlie Char-lee
D Delta Dell-Tah
E Echo Eck-oh
F Foxtrot Foks-trot
G Golf Golf
H Hotel Hoh-tel
I India In-dee-ah
J Juliett Jew-lee-ett
K Kilo Key-loh
L Lima Lee-mah
M Mike Mike
N November No-vem-ber
O Oscar Oss-cah
P Papa Pah-pah
Q Quebec Keh-beck
R Romeo Row-me-oh
S Sierra See-air-rah
T Tango Tang-go
U Uniform You-nee-form
V Victor Vik-tah
W Whiskey Wiss-key
X Xray Ecks-ray
Y Yankee Yang-key
Z Zulu Zoo-loo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had thought something called Aviation Daily News would be a reputable site....guess not.

 

If nothing else it  proves how unrelaible “News” is in today’s world. I Checked out the FAA site...nothing on it about this change.

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DEFCON said:

Your anti Trump obsession is almost psychopathic in scale & scope Deicer.

It's clear that you aren't a capitalist, a conservative, a supporter of Western culture, or even a modern liberal.

So if you don't mind, I'd appreciate your taking a moment to answer a question.

What form of political ideology would you prefer to see emerge from the ashes of Western culture?

 

 

Good morning Defcon

They finally have released a study that explains why you are the way you are...

It isn't my opinion, it's science. 

People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

And the finding holds true across party lines

Older Americans are disproportionately more likely to share fake news on Facebook, according to a new analysis by researchers at New York and Princeton Universities. Older users shared more fake news than younger ones regardless of education, sex, race, income, or how many links they shared. In fact, age predicted their behavior better than any other characteristic — including party affiliation.

The role of fake news in influencing voter behavior has been debated continuously since Donald Trump’s surprising victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016. At least one study has found that pro-Trump fake news likely persuaded some people to vote for him over Clinton, influencing the election’s outcome. Another study found that relatively few people clicked on fake news links — but that their headlines likely traveled much further via the News Feed, making it difficult to quantify their true reach. The finding that older people are more likely to share fake news could help social media users and platforms design more effective interventions to stop them from being misled.

Today’s study, published in Science Advances, examined user behavior in the months before and after the 2016 US presidential election. In early 2016, the academics started working with research firm YouGov to assemble a panel of 3,500 people, which included both Facebook users and non-users. On November 16th, just after the election, they asked Facebook users on the panel to install an application that allowed them to share data including public profile fields, religious and political views, posts to their own timelines, and the pages that they followed. Users could opt in or out of sharing individual categories of data, and researchers did not have access to the News Feeds or data about their friends.

About 49 percent of study participants who used Facebook agreed to share their profile data. Researchers then checked links posted to their timelines against a list of web domains that have historically shared fake news, as compiled by BuzzFeed reporter Craig Silverman. Later, they checked the links against four other lists of fake news stories and domains to see whether the results would be consistent.

Across all age categories, sharing fake news was a relatively rare category. Only 8.5 percent of users in the study shared at least one link from a fake news site. Users who identified as conservative were more likely than users who identified as liberal to share fake news: 18 percent of Republicans shared links to fake news sites, compared to less than 4 percent of Democrats. The researchers attributed this finding largely to studies showing that in 2016, fake news overwhelmingly served to promote Trump’s candidacy.

But older users skewed the findings: 11 percent of users older than 65 shared a hoax, while just 3 percent of users 18 to 29 did. Facebook users ages 65 and older shared more than twice as many fake news articles than the next-oldest age group of 45 to 65, and nearly seven times as many fake news articles as the youngest age group (18 to 29).

“When we bring up the age finding, a lot of people say, ‘oh yeah, that’s obvious,’” co-author Andrew Guess, a political scientist at Princeton University, told The Verge. “For me, what is pretty striking is that the relationship holds even when you control for party affiliation or ideology. The fact that it’s independent of these other traits is pretty surprising to me. It’s not just being driven by older people being more conservative.”

The study did not draw a conclusion about why older users are more likely to share hoaxes, though the researchers point to two possible theories. The first is that older people, who came to the internet later, lack the digital literacy skills of their younger counterparts. The second is that people experience cognitive decline as they age, making them likelier to fall for hoaxes.

Regardless of age, the digital literacy gap has previously been blamed on users’ willingness to share hoaxes. Last year, WhatsApp began developing a program to promote digital literacy in India — where many of its 200 million users are relatively new to the internet — after a series of murders that may have been prompted by viral forwarding in the app. That program is aimed at users of all ages.

At the same time, elderly Americans are prone to falling for so many scams that the Federal Bureau of Investigations has a page devoted to them. It seems likely that a multi-pronged approach to reducing the spread of fake news will be more effective than trying to solve for only one variable.

Guess and his colleagues hope to test both hypotheses in the future. It won’t be easy: how to determine whether a person is digitally literate remains an open question. But at least some of the issue is likely to come down to design: fake news spreads quickly on Facebook in part because news articles generally look identical in the News Feed, whether they are posted by The New York Times or a clickbait farm.

Future research could decipher what people see in the News Feed, and whether there is a relationship between seeing fake news stories and sharing them. They speculate that users may be more likely to share fake stories if they were previously shared by a trusted friend.

Matthew Gentzkow, who has researched the efforts of Facebook’s efforts to slow the spread of fake news, said the new study’s findings about age could help tech platforms design more effective tools. (He was not involved in the NYU-Princeton study.)

“The age result in this paper points very directly toward at least narrowing down the set of solutions that are likely to be most effective,” said Gentzkow, a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. “If the problem is concentrated in a relatively small set of people, then thinking about the interventions that would be most effective for those people is going to take us a lot farther.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, deicer said:

Truth about the border crisis...

It’s far to common these days for those with an agenda to look at one aspect of a complex system and say, “ see, I told you so, I was right!”

There needs to be a comprehensive approach to this; sea ports are important, airports are important, border frontiers are important and the regulatory environment is important as well. Failure of one element leads to overall systemic failure. You could have very robust physical interdiction at all venues but if your regulatory system is easily exploited they are rendered moot.

All round defence is an important battle tactic as is selection and maintenance of the aim. Problems will inevitably occur on the weakest front as those seeking advantage exploit those weaknesses. Physical barriers, judiciously applied, are very much a part of this nutritious breakfast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, a barrier is part of the solution, however, when all the evidence points to other areas that could benefit more and be more cost effective at solving the 'crisis', one would think that you should listen to your experts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your answer is an example of the weak stuffing that fills the heads of extreme socialists ... with no ability to debate, I guess you're limited to posting links ... 'like a rock' eh boestar? 

Edited by DEFCON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Rock I see here is the heads of the people that think a single news source provides anything but biased reporting.

most of the american news outlets are owned by a single company with a pretty severe bent to the right.  Others take a more severe bent to the left with very few siting in the center.  there are charts but you know how to google so I will leave that to you.

Trust FOX = NOPE

Trust CNN = NOPE

Those are the two largest which oddly are not "NEWS" stations but "Entertainment" stations.

Every one...EVERYONE has the right to their opinion and the right to lean to whatever side of the political spectrum they choose neither one is more correct that the other just that you will agree with the ones leaning the same way as you.

I personally sit very much in the middle.  I agree with policies on both sides of the spectrum but I can recognize BS when it pops up.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would disagree with your position on media and personal political preferences boestar?

But that all has nothing to do with the fact I asked a question above and received a link to a media opinion on an unrelated topic in return? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, deicer said:

...and be more cost effective at solving the 'crisis',

You raised an additional point that I left out of the previous post for the sake of brevity. I have always asked Liberals and Democrats a single question when the notion of “values” comes up; are you willing to pay for it?

It is time to consider the fact that the days of seeking “cost effective solutions” is over. Looking at unfettered immigration in Europe, the US and, to a lesser extent Canada, tends to support that theory IMO. It’s time for “willingness” to take the form of “payment.”

We have had several threads on climate change here that have debated things like, is it real and how do we arrest the ill effects? To date, none of those discussions have considered the potential fall out. Desertification, water shortages, mass migrations and physical security need some sober second thought now. Water shortages alone serve as an invitation to mass migration and also as an inducement to war. To its credit, the UN sees the potential and is in the preliminary stages of thinking about managing outcomes…. the UN Compact though is a separate thread.

So, I will leave you with a final thought, physical security (walls and the like) are infrastructure projects that are both time consuming and expensive undertakings. The time to complete those efforts is before you need them and the time to accept the expense is now. Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DEFCON said:

Who would disagree with your position on media and personal political preferences boestar?

But that all has nothing to do with the fact I asked a question above and received a link to a media opinion on an unrelated topic in return? 

 

indirectly I answered the question.  MIDDLE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

You raised an additional point that I left out of the previous post for the sake of brevity. I have always asked Liberals and Democrats a single question when the notion of “values” comes up; are you willing to pay for it?

It is time to consider the fact that the days of seeking “cost effective solutions” is over. Looking at unfettered immigration in Europe, the US and, to a lesser extent Canada, tends to support that theory IMO. It’s time for “willingness” to take the form of “payment.”

We have had several threads on climate change here that have debated things like, is it real and how do we arrest the ill effects? To date, none of those discussions have considered the potential fall out. Desertification, water shortages, mass migrations and physical security need some sober second thought now. Water shortages alone serve as an invitation to mass migration and also as an inducement to war. To its credit, the UN sees the potential and is in the preliminary stages of thinking about managing outcomes…. the UN Compact though is a separate thread.

So, I will leave you with a final thought, physical security (walls and the like) are infrastructure projects that are both time consuming and expensive undertakings. The time to complete those efforts is before you need them and the time to accept the expense is now. Cheers

 

The issue with the Liberal of today is not the sentiment, its the EXTREME sentiment.  Doing good is always a good thing Going overboard is just money for noting.  It doesnt help when they couldnt manage their way out of a wet paper bag.

The agendas  are polar opposite and always will be.  Unless someone meets in the middle then it will be do this undo this do this forever.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, boestar said:

.... it will be do this undo this do this forever.

 

Until the situation gets to the point where it can’t be undone.

As was the case with Rome, the amplitude of the oscillations and resulting flight path deviation from nominal are increasingly large and (to me) cause for concern. When governments respond to what they perceive people want, they need to be mindful of the electorate's fickle nature when it comes to paying for the values they profess to espouse. Where I the QFI in this scenario, I would be about to take control.

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this