The probem is fixing itself.

CNN has lost 80% of its audience since January.

Anonymous wrote:The “liberal New York Times” at it again!

E bikes and trees are not “niche”, they are climate change action. These items are essential and future focused, not something to be dismissed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is being accused of racism for calling Boston’s groundbreaking election of its first woman and first Asian American mayor a “disappointment” because she’s not black.

An online article and now-deleted tweet promoting the story both noted that Michelle Wu made history as “the first woman and first person of color elected to lead” the Massachusetts city — before then suggesting her victory wasn’t enough.

“While many are hailing it as a major turning point, others see it as more of a disappointment that the three Black candidates in the race couldn’t even come close,” the story still reads early Wednesday.

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/npr-calls-boston-election-of-michelle-wu-a-disappointment/

Maybe this won't be deleted without explanation this time.

What are the odds of that though?

NPR saying that some people think the election is disappointing is not the same as NPR calling the election disappointing, but I’m not surprised that you and the New York Post don’t know that,

It’s the same thing. I am sure some were disappointed she isn’t white or Latino, and some happy she is Asian, but NPR did not report on that. By picking and choosing the topics and angling articles on them, the bias is shown. “Others see it as more of a disappointment…”. What a crock. You can always find “others” on all issues. What makes that newsworthy or worthy of citing? Your bias is all.

Here’s a clue. Report the facts first. Then in analysis pieces, show all sides of the arguments in an non-biased manner. Finally, while you can have an Editorial section, the newspaper itself should never have a voice there. Let others voice their opinions and let both sides of an argument have a voice. That’s how a truly unbiased news service behaves.

Anonymous wrote:NPR is being accused of racism for calling Boston’s groundbreaking election of its first woman and first Asian American mayor a “disappointment” because she’s not black.

An online article and now-deleted tweet promoting the story both noted that Michelle Wu made history as “the first woman and first person of color elected to lead” the Massachusetts city — before then suggesting her victory wasn’t enough.

“While many are hailing it as a major turning point, others see it as more of a disappointment that the three Black candidates in the race couldn’t even come close,” the story still reads early Wednesday.

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/npr-calls-boston-election-of-michelle-wu-a-disappointment/

Maybe this won't be deleted without explanation this time.

What are the odds of that though?

NPR saying that some people think the election is disappointing is not the same as NPR calling the election disappointing, but I’m not surprised that you and the New York Post don’t know that,

NPR is being accused of racism for calling Boston’s groundbreaking election of its first woman and first Asian American mayor a “disappointment” because she’s not black.

An online article and now-deleted tweet promoting the story both noted that Michelle Wu made history as “the first woman and first person of color elected to lead” the Massachusetts city — before then suggesting her victory wasn’t enough.

“While many are hailing it as a major turning point, others see it as more of a disappointment that the three Black candidates in the race couldn’t even come close,” the story still reads early Wednesday.


https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/npr-calls-boston-election-of-michelle-wu-a-disappointment/


Maybe this won't be deleted without explanation this time.

What are the odds of that though?

Chuck Todd sucks. How did he get where he is? He is the worst. I don’t know anyone who likes him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A thread full of navelgazing.

Meanwhile there's another active thread that's been showing current lies of FOX News. FOX tells provable lies on a daily basis... whereas the right whines about stuff that happened years ago, like "the Covington kid" who got nothing more than a nuisance settlement.

I’m actually the OP of that thread and I think both threads are worthy of discussion. It’s important to note how the “mainstream” - the corporate, GOP owned and supporting - media skews its message to make Democrats look bad, always. The Democrats got landmark legislation done and… this is the result.

Chuck Todd is so bad at everything.

Anonymous wrote:A thread full of navelgazing.

Meanwhile there's another active thread that's been showing current lies of FOX News. FOX tells provable lies on a daily basis... whereas the right whines about stuff that happened years ago, like "the Covington kid" who got nothing more than a nuisance settlement.

I’m actually the OP of that thread and I think both threads are worthy of discussion. It’s important to note how the “mainstream” - the corporate, GOP owned and supporting - media skews its message to make Democrats look bad, always. The Democrats got landmark legislation done and… this is the result.

A thread full of navelgazing.

Meanwhile there's another active thread that's been showing current lies of FOX News. FOX tells provable lies on a daily basis... whereas the right whines about stuff that happened years ago, like "the Covington kid" who got nothing more than a nuisance settlement.

The “liberal New York Times” at it again!

This must be the 500th thread on where the media leans.

Another great example of the “liberal” media using the GOP’s framing:

Anonymous wrote:In the same way that there is a mega thread listing all the evidence of GOP corruption, this would be a great thread to mega thread about how the “liberal” media is right wing. I’ve seen several dozen examples of this kind of corporate favoritism just from the NYT in the last few years.

I'd actually call the MSM "neoliberal," which means they are all in on Wokism but totally ignore issues of class. The corporations want you to focus a lot more on race and gender than of class. Corporate board members are incredibly weathy. Top reporters range from very well paid to filthy rich. They are happy to let a few more black people into the top ranks as long as you don't ask why they make so much money. They'd rather you think other voters are racist so you split your vote than you all get together and vote based on class. You'd be surprised how many people on the right see this and how many people on the left don't.