Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:According to their website they are anonymous. This does not mean they are not credible -- journalism relies on anonymous sources -- but it does mean that journalists have to vet and ideally double-source the information carefully. In theory it is totally credible that a group of experts could put together something like ProporNot.
Really? Generally, when a reporter quotes anonymous sources, we know WHO the reporter is--and that the reporter knows who the sources are. This is no different from an anonymous message board. You don't understand that?
?? I'm talking about the Washington Post article citing them. Not DCUM.
Anonymous wrote:What bothers me most is that Obama was president for eight years, and yet he has done NOTHING about this very dangerous Russian infiltration. He hasn't even bothered to mention it...
Wait a minute... Could he be in on it too??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In between all these stupid posts calling other posters Russian trolls, has anyone actually taken the time to check out the organization WaPo used as their main source - Prop or Not?
Very scary that a supposedly credible news organization like WaPo would promote this alleged non-partisan group of "experts" and what they say is Russian propaganda or not. No one knows who actually works for Prop or Not. They refuse to let anyone know. We have no idea who is funding them or if they are actually experts in anything.
And their list of supposed Russian propaganda news orgs include prominent, respected organizations on both sides of the political aisle.
http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html?m=1
Had anyone even heard of the organization before the WaPo article? What evidence do we have that they're credible?
According to their website they are anonymous. This does not mean they are not credible -- journalism relies on anonymous sources -- but it does mean that journalists have to vet and ideally double-source the information carefully. In theory it is totally credible that a group of experts could put together something like ProporNot.
Anonymous wrote:According to their website they are anonymous. This does not mean they are not credible -- journalism relies on anonymous sources -- but it does mean that journalists have to vet and ideally double-source the information carefully. In theory it is totally credible that a group of experts could put together something like ProporNot.
Really? Generally, when a reporter quotes anonymous sources, we know WHO the reporter is--and that the reporter knows who the sources are. This is no different from an anonymous message board. You don't understand that?
According to their website they are anonymous. This does not mean they are not credible -- journalism relies on anonymous sources -- but it does mean that journalists have to vet and ideally double-source the information carefully. In theory it is totally credible that a group of experts could put together something like ProporNot.
Anonymous wrote:this is a Nothingburger.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In between all these stupid posts calling other posters Russian trolls, has anyone actually taken the time to check out the organization WaPo used as their main source - Prop or Not?
Very scary that a supposedly credible news organization like WaPo would promote this alleged non-partisan group of "experts" and what they say is Russian propaganda or not. No one knows who actually works for Prop or Not. They refuse to let anyone know. We have no idea who is funding them or if they are actually experts in anything.
And their list of supposed Russian propaganda news orgs include prominent, respected organizations on both sides of the political aisle.
http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html?m=1
Had anyone even heard of the organization before the WaPo article? What evidence do we have that they're credible?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oooooh, those scary Russians. Said angry white men circa 1980. Says the angry pantsuit nation now.
No, you're not so scary. But the problem is our President-elect and his crowd are Putin fan-boys/girls and they seem to be borrowing their ideas and rhetoric from him. That's disturbing because I want an American-style President, not a demagogic strongman. Garry Kasparov's column from July is worth reading again: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/donald-trump-reminds-me-of-vladimir-putin--and-that-is-terrifying/2016/07/23/36397692-50e5-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html?utm_term=.9aa88793d16b
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The show "The Americans" is set in the early 1980s....so, uh, yeah, viable travel agencies. If you live/d in the U.S., and are old enough to post here, you'd know that's how virtually all travel was arranged well up until the late 1990s.
This forum is so disappointing now. I remember how smart it used to be, before this vile infestation of trolls, bots and to use Trumpspeak, losers.
OMG, are you people really now basing all this Russia hysteria on the premise of a TV show ??
Anonymous wrote:Oooooh, those scary Russians. Said angry white men circa 1980. Says the angry pantsuit nation now.
This forum is so disappointing now. I remember how smart it used to be, before this vile infestation of trolls, bots and to use Trumpspeak, losers.
Anonymous wrote:In between all these stupid posts calling other posters Russian trolls, has anyone actually taken the time to check out the organization WaPo used as their main source - Prop or Not?
Very scary that a supposedly credible news organization like WaPo would promote this alleged non-partisan group of "experts" and what they say is Russian propaganda or not. No one knows who actually works for Prop or Not. They refuse to let anyone know. We have no idea who is funding them or if they are actually experts in anything.
And their list of supposed Russian propaganda news orgs include prominent, respected organizations on both sides of the political aisle.
http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html?m=1
Anonymous wrote:The show "The Americans" is set in the early 1980s....so, uh, yeah, viable travel agencies. If you live/d in the U.S., and are old enough to post here, you'd know that's how virtually all travel was arranged well up until the late 1990s.
This forum is so disappointing now. I remember how smart it used to be, before this vile infestation of trolls, bots and to use Trumpspeak, losers.