NationStates

Cekoviu wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:Yeah I don’t trust them on climate change when they say it doesn’t exist but CNN is a lot worse when it comes to twisting facts

I don't like CNN much, but this is flatly untrue. CNN on Politifact vs FOX on Politifact - when combined, that puts CNN at 72% half true or better and 28% mostly false or worse, compared to 41% half true or better and 59% mostly false or worse for FOX. That's not just bad, that's fucking abysmal.

The problem with CNN isn’t that it’s fake, it’s completely real. The problem begins with the fact that it does not report on a lot of things. take for example; when trump called Baltimore and Cummings “drug infested.” They cries racist! But CNN never reported that Cummings called children in Baltimore “walking like zombies” and “drug infested”

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Highever wrote:I mean you just said you arent surprised that another news outlet does, so why is Fox exempt from doing the same?

Well idk but CNN is worse than fox because fox is actually more centrist some programs are liberal but really only the prime time programs are super conservative. I wouldn’t think they’d lie because they are the #1 watched News Channel but I guess I’m wrong. But a good point they had was that the left hated plastic straws but donates 12,000 plastic syringes a day

I dont really know how they can get that statistic and somehow know the doners political alignments.

Highever wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:Well idk but CNN is worse than fox because fox is actually more centrist some programs are liberal but really only the prime time programs are super conservative. I wouldn’t think they’d lie because they are the #1 watched News Channel but I guess I’m wrong. But a good point they had was that the left hated plastic straws but donates 12,000 plastic syringes a day

I dont really know how they can get that statistic and somehow know the doners political alignments.

They don’t know the political alignments but the left made it cheaper to buy syrringes and endorsed them but banned straws. The (liberal) state government pays for them

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:I don't like CNN much, but this is flatly untrue. CNN on Politifact vs FOX on Politifact - when combined, that puts CNN at 72% half true or better and 28% mostly false or worse, compared to 41% half true or better and 59% mostly false or worse for FOX. That's not just bad, that's fucking abysmal.

The problem with CNN isn’t that it’s fake, it’s completely real. The problem begins with the fact that it does not report on a lot of things. take for example; when trump called Baltimore and Cummings “drug infested.” They cries racist! But CNN never reported that Cummings called children in Baltimore “walking like zombies” and “drug infested”

It's almost like a 1999 out-of-context comment isn't worth reporting on compared to a comment made recently by the sitting president of the United States.

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Highever wrote:I dont really know how they can get that statistic and somehow know the doners political alignments.

They don’t know the political alignments but the left made it cheaper to buy syrringes and endorsed them but banned straws. The (liberal) state government pays for them

Are you talking about the campaign to prevent the spread of diseases like HIV and hepatitis?

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Highever wrote:I mean you just said you arent surprised that another news outlet does, so why is Fox exempt from doing the same?

Well idk but CNN is worse than fox because fox is actually more centrist some programs are liberal but really only the prime time programs are super conservative. I wouldn’t think they’d lie because they are the #1 watched News Channel but I guess I’m wrong. But a good point they had was that the left hated plastic straws but donates 12,000 plastic syringes a day

It's almost as if those are different things.

Highever wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:They don’t know the political alignments but the left made it cheaper to buy syrringes and endorsed them but banned straws. The (liberal) state government pays for them

Are you talking about the campaign to prevent the spread of diseases like HIV and hepatitis?

Clearly a left wing plot.

Cekoviu wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:The problem with CNN isn’t that it’s fake, it’s completely real. The problem begins with the fact that it does not report on a lot of things. take for example; when trump called Baltimore and Cummings “drug infested.” They cries racist! But CNN never reported that Cummings called children in Baltimore “walking like zombies” and “drug infested”

It's almost like a 1999 out-of-context comment isn't worth reporting on compared to a comment made recently by the sitting president of the United States.

But if trump is racist it makes Cummings racist.

Cekoviu wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:And you're little more than a bigot.

I find it very odd that you throw bigot around with no basis and then complain when people do the same to you.

Seems pretty accurate in that instance, though perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain why it's not.

It honestly depends on the school or to be more accurate it depends on the teacher. During my academic career I had a number of teachers who were biased towards the left, but by the same token I also had a number of them who were right wing/independents. Then again that's just my experience.

Ruffletrump wrote:It honestly depends on the school or to be more accurate it depends on the teacher. During my academic career I had a number of teachers who were biased towards the left, but by the same token I also had a number of them who were right wing/independents. Then again that's just my experience.

Well OP said his textbook endorsed Cummings

Lately, public schools have been leftist. If I ever have kids, I'll send them to a private school.

Tornado Queendom wrote:Lately, public schools have been leftist. If I ever have kids, I'll send them to a private school.

So it's not the bias that bothers you, it's the leaning of the bias.

Strahcoin wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:
I legitimately have no idea how to respond to this. There's no way anyone can seriously say that with a straight face.

Barring maybe mega-corporations and government elitists, rich people don't take government welfare benefits.

Really? That's what you point to as greed?

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Ruffletrump wrote:It honestly depends on the school or to be more accurate it depends on the teacher. During my academic career I had a number of teachers who were biased towards the left, but by the same token I also had a number of them who were right wing/independents. Then again that's just my experience.

Well OP said his textbook endorsed Cummings

Well that's the OP's experience and his school may very well have been biased. That's not necessarily indicative of all schools however. Personally, I know that the one I attended was fairly neutral in its political leanings(ie it had a fairly balanced curriculum with most of the teachers doing their best to not inject their politics into their lessons.)

Cekoviu wrote:

Cruciland wrote:You'd be hard-pressed to find a "source" that doesn't give an opinion on the matter. You're better off looking at the actual stories, surveys, facts, statistics, and citations provided in the opinionated piece than trying to write it off. If you think that a good source exists which can cover this subject in an unbiased manner, then go ahead and find such a "source" describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology in academia.

Don't worry, I'll have a forum weapon ready by the time you get back.

Those goalposts are somehow exceeding the speed of light there. First claiming indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism, and then moving to "prevalence of leftist ideology." Pretty good indicator that you're wrong if you have to move them that far.

"Describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology" is not a statement meant to move the goalposts. It is asking you, the person rejecting my sources for being opinionated, to find a source which has no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent, and if applicable, the extent to which it is. I still stand by the idea that it is appallingly prevalent, and resorts to indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism. My challenge to you is to find an article which talks about the subject (of which I am drawing a conclusion on) in a way which does not inevitably wind up taking a side. Because apparently, you seem to reject anything which gives an opinion on the matter.

...unless if it supports your own side, perhaps?

The schools I attended taught egalitarianism and a narrative-based view of slavery presumably meant to promote white guilt.

United New England wrote:As Stephen Colbert once said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

“Reality Academia has a well-known liberal bias.”

Colbert has a very authoritarian view of knowledge that holds academics and journalists as the ultimate arbiters of truth.

The Archipelago Territory wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:I don't like CNN much, but this is flatly untrue. CNN on Politifact vs FOX on Politifact - when combined, that puts CNN at 72% half true or better and 28% mostly false or worse, compared to 41% half true or better and 59% mostly false or worse for FOX. That's not just bad, that's fucking abysmal.

The problem with CNN isn’t that it’s fake, it’s completely real. The problem begins with the fact that it does not report on a lot of things. take for example; when trump called Baltimore and Cummings “drug infested.” They cries racist! But CNN never reported that Cummings called children in Baltimore “walking like zombies” and “drug infested”

FOX News, however, threw in that side of the story when nobody else would. So much for Politifact's verdict.

Depends? I mean, at some standard, boilerplate elementary school in a medium-sized city, I doubt you'd find any ideology, let alone any ideological bias. At universities, well, there is usually an overall political lean one way or the other, but those who cry about "regressive college campuses" or whatever generally miss the mark entirely.

As for my experience, I went to Catholic school up until Grade 12, and the political bias I was exposed to was generally more of a Catholic, milquetoast conservative mindset. Now that I'm in Uni, it's no secret that most professors lean left, but not to the point of them shoving their ideals down your throat, not even remotely close to that.

STEM is valuable and should be free from political censorship.

Thyrgga wrote:The schools I attended taught egalitarianism and a narrative-based view of slavery presumably meant to promote white guilt.

United New England wrote:As Stephen Colbert once said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

“Reality Academia has a well-known liberal bias.”

Colbert has a very authoritarian view of knowledge that holds academics and journalists as the ultimate arbiters of truth.

Slavery being a terrible institution and, at least in the US, revolving around ideas of racial superiority is hardly some sort of false narrative.

Cekoviu wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:Not true. I am a Republican irl and believe in climate change. However nothing can be done here in the US since India and China are behind 95% of it and literally refuse to do anything.

The United States produces nearly half of China's CO₂ emissions per year despite having less than a third of its population and contributes 13.77% of total CO₂ emissions per year despite having >5% of the world's population, with China and India together producing 35.96% of CO₂ emissions. source
This statement is simply contrary to reality; have you even done any reading whatsoever of the statistics?

The air/environment in the U.S. seems to be far better than that in China.

Cekoviu wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:Does that mean that the Democrat Party might merely be virtue signalling?

In a vacuum? Yes.
And it's the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party.

Anyways, at least Trump didn't do anything that implies racism.

Haven't laughed this hard in a while, thanks.

1. What's that supposed to mean?
2. Trump at one point decided to call it the "Radical Left Democrat Party". It ceased to be democratic ("for the people"), and it radicalized to the left.
3. Too much CNN/MSNBC/ABC/PBS/NBC/etc.?

Cekoviu wrote:

The Archipelago Territory wrote:Yeah I don’t trust them on climate change when they say it doesn’t exist but CNN is a lot worse when it comes to twisting facts

I don't like CNN much, but this is flatly untrue. CNN on Politifact vs FOX on Politifact - when combined, that puts CNN at 72% half true or better and 28% mostly false or worse, compared to 41% half true or better and 59% mostly false or worse for FOX. That's not just bad, that's fucking abysmal.

And how do you know whether or not Politifact is using false (or twisted) facts/statistics?

Necroghastia wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:

Barring maybe mega-corporations and government elitists, rich people don't take government welfare benefits.

Really? That's what you point to as greed?

If the poor people needed money, they should just work for it - not take it from the hard-working taxpayers.

Neko-koku wrote:STEM is valuable and should be free from political censorship.

Yes.

Strahcoin wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:
Really? That's what you point to as greed?

If the poor people needed money, they should just work for it - not take it from the hard-working taxpayers.

You honestly have no idea how ignorant this viewpoint is, do you? Do you seriously think people on welfare just laze around all day?

Neko-koku wrote:STEM is valuable and should be free from political censorship.

Yes.

Quite bold words coming from someone who denies CO2's role in climate change and has a "only 2 genders" quip in their sig.

Necroghastia wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:
If the poor people needed money, they should just work for it - not take it from the hard-working taxpayers.

You honestly have no idea how ignorant this viewpoint is, do you? Do you seriously think people on welfare just laze around all day?

Yes.

Quite bold words coming from someone who denies CO2's role in climate change and has a "only 2 genders" quip in their sig.

Obviously that is what they do, duh. Facing the realities that there are for more factors is just to complicated. Just saying they're lazy makes it far easier than actually understanding the problem.

Necroghastia wrote:

Strahcoin wrote:
If the poor people needed money, they should just work for it - not take it from the hard-working taxpayers.

You honestly have no idea how ignorant this viewpoint is, do you? Do you seriously think people on welfare just laze around all day?

Yes.

Quite bold words coming from someone who denies CO2's role in climate change and has a "only 2 genders" quip in their sig.

1. If they worked for money - and were decent enough to get at least a modest-paying job (and there are many of them now) and spend frugally, then they would have no need for welfare.
2. The idea of CO₂ heavily influencing climate change and it being detrimental is part of political indoctrination. I fell for it before; now, I know better. And the "two genders" thing is common sense.

Highever wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:
You honestly have no idea how ignorant this viewpoint is, do you? Do you seriously think people on welfare just laze around all day?



Quite bold words coming from someone who denies CO2's role in climate change and has a "only 2 genders" quip in their sig.

Obviously that is what they do, duh. Facing the realities that there are for more factors is just to complicated. Just saying they're lazy makes it far easier than actually understanding the problem.

No need to be sarcastic. While it's true that high taxes and job-killing regulations do force some people into welfare, they are getting repealed now that Trump is in office.