02-16-2017, 05:42 PM
(02-16-2017, 05:16 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah well, the way I see it some sources are more credible then others. Breitbart is more or less an alt-right smearsheet in my book, Fox is very opinionated (although I guess seldomly actually factually wrong), there are "liberal" (you use that word all wrong, btw. :) ) equivalents. CNN got the facts straight I guess, but there is bias between the lines (which I don't mind). My MSM (learned that one) mistrust stems more from foreign affairs or times when wars broke out, where I found the US mainstream media coverage to be very one-sided and, let's say, US friendly. But sure, that is another instance than we see here.
I see your media outlets as infuenced by many interest groups. As is ours, of course, my country is probably way worse in that respect. But credibility does not come from the outlet, none of your outlets deserves credibility on its name alone. If the sources are reliable, then OK. When there are more or less rumours, hearsay and stuff like that, I take things with a grain of salt and force myself to do so. No matter if I see them on FOX (which never happens anyway) or CNN or wherever.
Which especially applies to the Russia ties of Trump. I try to base my take on the things that really are there. Do they have Kompromat on him or anyone, I do not yet know that, no matter what buzzfeed says. (If I had to guess I would say probably plenty, though.
Fox is actually quite often factually wrong. Entire books have been written on this subject, btw.
JOHN ROBERTS: From time to time in the years to come, I hope you will be treated unfairly so that you will come to know the value of justice... I wish you bad luck, again, from time to time so that you will be conscious of the role of chance in life and understand that your success is not completely deserved and that the failure of others is not completely deserved either.
