Another peaceful BLM activist...

[dennishoddy]

Okay, I'll admit you caught me in one thing --- I rarely rely on OSA at all for unbiased opinions. Generally speaking all US media is all biased from the major networks (CNN, Fox, etc) down to social (FB/Twitter/Insta) and then cesspools like we have here (tongue in cheek implied). Local news stations are unreliable as well since so many are owned by Sinclair or other conglomerates where they'll dictate scripts down to local personalities to give it a veneer of authenticity.

Where possible I prefer reporting from outside the states such as the BBC. Within the states, and I say this knowing people will fight me over this claiming they are leftist crap, I prefer NPR. However, they are the only one that being a public non-profit news org that has to weave a line between what some would consider "the libtards" that support them and "the magtards" in Congress that want to defund them. So to exist they have to work to go down the center and piss neither crowd off. That is not to say I don't take exception to many of their stories, programs of pieces, but generally I find their coverage much less slanted than say a CNN or a Fox. Out of the major networks, I'd probably think of MSNBC first. To be honest, I don't have cable and haven't really watched TV in a few years so most of the time if I see coverage from any major network its pieces on published online, so that could play into my assessments as well.

Even that's not really enough so what I'd hope for to get started for perspective is to be able to see a story as reported by a couple different levels of coverage if you will --- a major publication (NYT, WaPo, etc), network, and local. If there are independent reports (social media) all the better. At the end of the day, since there's no way to actually resolve the bias problem, the solution becomes deliberate consumption of different viewpoints and weighing each of their merits.

Ok, I get where your coming from now. MSNBC, being your fav with commentary from rachael mad cow madow that has drummed the narrative of the DNC for many years saying Trump is in his last days, Trump is going to be arrested, Trump is an agent of Russia, Trump is blah, blah, blah. If her mouth is moving, she is lying. The rest of the mob on that channel are just a few links of stupid below her.
You say you don't have cable and you don't watch TV, yet you watch the liberal cable news networks.
Ok, it could be online, yet you profess to watch pieces of online NYT, and WAPO which are subscriber channels online. so what is it? You can't watch links from WAPO unless your a subscriber.
Maybe form opinions from facebook posts or twitter? The same facebook that falsely said 20,000 people were being bused into our hometown white led blm march which was totally false?
Your trying to come across as non biased, but your sources are anything but.
God help you if you listen to the pompous asses on NPR and consider them a verifiable source on anything except smugness.

 

[Rez Exelon]

Ok, I get where your coming from now. MSNBC, being your fav with commentary from rachael mad cow madow that has drummed the narrative of the DNC for many years saying Trump is in his last days, Trump is going to be arrested, Trump is an agent of Russia, Trump is blah, blah, blah. If her mouth is moving, she is lying. The rest of the mob on that channel are just a few links of stupid below her.
You say you don't have cable and you don't watch TV, yet you watch the liberal cable news networks.
Ok, it could be online, yet you profess to watch pieces of online NYT, and WAPO which are subscriber channels online. so what is it? You can't watch links from WAPO unless your a subscriber.
Maybe form opinions from facebook posts or twitter? The same facebook that falsely said 20,000 people were being bused into our hometown white led blm march which was totally false?
Your trying to come across as non biased, but your sources are anything but.
God help you if you listen to the pompous asses on NPR and consider them a verifiable source on anything except smugness.

/sigh/ I knew a post along these lines was coming and yet I wasted my time and find myself pot-committed to responding. I'll bullet point like the last time in this thread.

* Again, and for the record, I don't have cable. I had it when I went to TU (because it was part of the room and board), and then didn't get it again until around 2009 --- kept it till my contract was up in 2011 and haven't had it since then. I have a TV with Netflix so we can put on cartoons for my daughter.
* I don't give a flying **** about Rachael Maddow. I really don't give a flying **** about many of the talking heads. I couldn't pick them out of a line up with a gun to my head for the most part --- typically I only see them if I watch a clip that someone is posting in a debate.
* Using the amazing power of the internet that we have in 2020 it is possible to get many different sources of information. And also it is possible to read information without it coming from a talking head. That is by far my preferred method of getting information. I find most of the time it's more neutral than talking head information as well.
* I don't know about the bus thing or where it came from --- I saw people here talking about it (it might have been you posting in fact, I don't remember) and never investigated because honestly it didn't affect me and I wasn't going to show up to any sort of counter protest. Perhaps if it came across your feed and not mine, that could indicate your connections are sharing bad intel.
* I am not sure if you're aware but there are endless ways around paywalls. I've made my living on technology for 20 years so maybe I just don't think about it. For every site that has a paywall there also exists a way around said paywall.

Again, not that I think much of that matters as I'm relatively sure that if you've read this far, then by now you're already working to think of ways to argue and discredit the above text because the whole . That shows a good deal of your character to try to underswing that one with:

Who is the "unbiased" resource you use? Just an inquiring mind.

"Just an inquiring mind" huh? One that wants to go on and try to make assumptions about who I am and what I'm about? What shows I watch or don't watch or what facebook posts I see? And then one that closes on with an assignment of smugness to someone else. This is the exact style post I figured was coming.

Finally, I'll quote the message that started this whole string...

Why even cite the article if you think it's crap. I mean I'm sure that there is plenty of coverage on Breitbart Fox or some other "completely unbiased" source.

...and for the second time point out the subtext was that OP seems to have posted an article whose content disagreed with his post, and the implied sarcasm of my assessment was that if the post and article were going to be slanted a certain way, maybe it would have at least been worth it to find an article that correlated to the post rather than using a source that disagreed with it, because as others have said --- for every story there are many ways to tell it.

You take care now.

 

[Glocktogo]

Then why don't we all kneel down on both knees to antifa and BLM to beg forgiveness then turn in our guns? (Not griping at your comment, just another question because I agree with your comment)
We aren't going to change or organize anything on OSA, but I'm shocked that there is not a national pushback organized by someone with money and influence to combat this narrative.
A comment from above that said some anti-anti fa rally's might bring out people that may be misinterpreted to put it politically correct.
Of course it would. What in the hell does the anti fa rally's bring out? Thugs, looters and those that burn businesses is what comes out.
The media glorify's them, but if some conservative at a rally took the liberty to just take down an offensive sign posted by the left, the entire weight of the media would be brought down on them and their family that would focus on costing their jobs an livelihoods just like the soccer player (don't remember his name) who was half a continent away when his wife posted all lives matter. He lost his position on the team. Drew Brees, NFL player just about got fired from his team by saying all lives matter, not just black lives.
Yet these same people want to put parents and children in jail for being bully's because their child didn't get a participation trophy. Think about that. A party that abhors bullying to the point they would just about have firing squads for classmates that participated in it are the biggest bully's in the world when you disagree with them politically.
The biggest bully's in the world are dimocraps and the media that support them. Conservative rally's are always billed as extremist and racist while those that burn and loot are called freedom fighters.
BTW since I earlier mentioned BLM was having a march in Ponca City, I thought I'd bring up the result. Falsebook had a rumor that hell was about to hit as 20,000 marchers were being bused in that morning.
I immediately called BS because nobody was going to sponsor 266 buses to bring protesters to a town that has been integrated since the 50's. Minorities live all over town attend every school, etc. It's not an issue in this town.
In reality, a white person sponsored the march. 80% approximately were white, 10 or so percent were native american and another 10 percent or so were black in my personal observation by watching live streaming on the local news outlet. Don't hold me to those percentages, as it was a guesstimate.

Yeah, I've never condoned, much less supported acts of violence or destruction. Even totalitarian oppressors should be mitigated with the least amount of damage possible.

Yet I'll never say "All Lives Matter", simply because they don't in reality and in rare cases, they shouldn't. I mean I'll never say the lives of people like John Wayne Gacy, Osama bin Laden, Timothy McVeigh, John Allen Muhammed, Kim Jong-un, etc. matter. They don't. The same goes for anyone perpetrating anarchy that hurts and kills others.

What does matter is the acts they commit. I mean I'd never support what McVeigh did and I'd put a bullet between his eyes for his troubles if I caught him trying to blow up a building. But you have to admit that the federal government got pretty quiet after the OKC bombing. When the Bundy Ranch thing kicked off, it was WAY different from Waco & Ruby Ridge. Maybe, just maybe, a lesson was at least partially learned?

It would be so much better if people could effect change without violence and destruction. But what can we expect if change is impossible otherwise? We know very well what it feels like to have the government AND society against us overall as strong 2A advocates. So while I'll never support stupidity like riots, looting and vandalism, I can set aside my issues long enough to put myself in their shoes, and recognize that I'd never want to change places with them. You don't have to be a criminal or have an unpopular opinion in order to feel oppressed in some circles. All you have to do is look a certain way and live in a certain place. That would suck if it applied to any of us.

So maybe, just maybe, we could all learn a thing or two from their movement. If nothing else, just how to treat each other would be a positive outcome. Guess I'm just crazy like that.

You are not alone. You’ve been tossed into the same bucket as Glocktogo and the other radical leftists.

If I have to say so myself, I think I'm killing it. Positively wallowing in it as they say!

 

[ignerntbend]

I can see you sitting with SMS in your mom’s basement wearing Che Guevara tshirts, just hanging out, blowing a few bowls and weeping about the environment.

 

[chuter]

/
* I am not sure if you're aware but there are endless ways around paywalls. I've made my living on technology for 20 years so maybe I just don't think about it. For every site that has a paywall there also exists a way around said paywall.

Sounds like stealing....

 

[Rez Exelon]

Sounds like stealing....

Were there a compiled listed of all internet crimes, then maybe. But then by that logic, VPNs are bad (stealing valuable tracking data from companies), shopping is bad (since many places don't collect tax), trolling is bad (could incite violence in some cases), AdBlock is horrible (taking away all the valueable ad impressions AND blocking tracking data), Incognito/private modes are bad (since just that gets around many paywalls and it blocks some big data collection), and the list goes on and on and on.

The really funny thing is that in my experience most sites didn't have paywalls until Ad Block came along. And Ad Block came along because people got tired of virus laced audio/video ads screaming junk at page load.

 

[chuter]

So, stealing then.

 

[Rez Exelon]

So, stealing then.

Whatever you want to call it.

Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554

• Phone: 1-888-225-5322
• TTY: 1-888-835-5322
• ASL Video Call: 1-844-432-2275
• ASL Video Call: Web
• Fax: 1-866-418-0232
• Contact Us

There --- in case you want to narc out the majority of internet users for various crimes. Estimates are 25% of users are adblocking alone. Tell em I sent you.

 

[chuter]

Ad blocking is not stealing. That's like going to the kitchen during commercials. I'm not required to view ads.
I'm not going to rat you out, you have to live with your stealing, not me.

 

[Hobbes]

Here's the shootist

Unreasonable boogaloo

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-cruz-damon-gutzwiller-boogaloo-a9562386.html