How did I miss this story? (Ahmaud Arbery shooting in Georgia)[MERGED] (3 Viewers)

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
Your dismissed the discussion immediately this morning without a second thought. Dont act like you think for yourself. There is absolutely zero nuance to your POV.
The country has about a century of catch-up before ‘nuance’ is anything but a laughable rhetorical fallacy
To be clear there is no nuance until there is equity
 

Madmarsha

Feral housewife
VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
36,309
Reaction score
52,025
Offline
It's crazy to think that if these idiots hadn't have filmed their own crime, they'd probably be free right now, and maybe not even charged.
That's what's so rich about the karma in this. Show the video. "Case closed". The phrase is "If you see something, SAY something", not "DO something".
 

kcirdor

Still Clackin
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
19,611
Reaction score
9,066
Offline
The country has about a century of catch-up before ‘nuance’ is anything but a laughable rhetorical fallacy
To be clear there is no nuance until there is equity
Got it. You will remain an overly emotional tribalist for eternity. Tribalism is the new racism. ZERO NUANCE? WOW. What a religious zealot. But I'm not gonna wait till Lent for you to go away.

Edit: That's a shame. Ignoring a member still shows when they post. Edit2: never mind, leaving the page and coming back fixed that.
 

Saint by the Bay

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Sep 2, 1999
Messages
32,375
Reaction score
19,538
Age
48
Location
Houston
Online
But you posted a Tucker Carlson interview- that’s at least a tacit endorsement

I watched the Tucker interview and have brought it up on the thread and I like pond scum more than him (and I think it's smarter). I watched to hear Rittenhouse in his own words, not Tucker "Replacement Theory" Carlson.
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
40,493
Reaction score
29,402
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
All I see is a lot of talking past each other. Not really a meeting of the minds as much as saying words and not taking each other seriously. So, we tend to leave this type of discussion unconvinced that anyone has much meaningful to say.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
I watched the Tucker interview and have brought it up on the thread and I like pond scum more than him (and I think it's smarter). I watched to hear Rittenhouse in his own words, not Tucker "Replacement Theory" Carlson.
Fair enough- I still hold to McLuan’s ‘the medium is the message’
Any words spoken on a TC show are within the parentheses of TC
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
All I see is a lot of talking past each other. Not really a meeting of the minds as much as saying words and not taking each other seriously. So, we tend to leave this type of discussion unconvinced that anyone has much meaningful to say.
What? No!
He quit. I won.
The record must reflect that
😁
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
40,493
Reaction score
29,402
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
Fair enough- I still hold to McLuan’s ‘the medium is the message’
Any words spoken on a TC show are within the parentheses of TC
I don't really buy this. News media quotes people from rival outlets all the time. That's no endorsement of rival outlet or the medium. The problem is you seem to be unable to separate the guest from that medium. I don't really understand wearing blinders when it's not really needed.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
I don't really buy this. News media quotes people from rival outlets all the time. That's no endorsement of rival outlet or the medium. The problem is you seem to be unable to separate the guest from that medium. I don't really understand wearing blinders when it's not really needed.
I’d argue corrective lenses not blinders
But that’s a major premise of media literacy, there is no ‘raw data’ in broadcast media - everything is rehearsed, scripted, edited, et al
I’m not saying there is no value to what you see/hear, but it must be understood that’s it’s all engineered

The great benefit of Jon Stewart (and Colbert and Oliver, et al) is they’re at least honest about their dishonesty
My responsibility to myself would be wearing the same corrective lenses if I was watching Rachel Maddow interview a metoo survivor or the like

But as far as Carlson, when Jon Stewart spanked him on his own show decades ago; JS was spot on and TC has done nothing but get substantially worse - he provides no value to the national discourse, but does poison
 

V Chip

Truth Addict (aww ^&%$ I got a head rush)
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 14, 2001
Messages
12,976
Reaction score
17,214
Age
54
Location
Close enough to ATL to smell the stink of Falcons
Offline
Fair enough- I still hold to McLuan’s ‘the medium is the message’
Any words spoken on a TC show are within the parentheses of TC
I get both sides of this particular point (oh sheet I said “both sides”).

On the one hand, if you get your message out even to those not really willing to hear it, it’s still a potentially good thing.

But there are some media personalities and outlets that should be avoided because of the inevitable muck that will dilute or even make the point moot.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
I get both sides of this particular point (oh sheet I said “both sides”).

On the one hand, if you get your message out even to those not really willing to hear it, it’s still a potentially good thing.

But there are some media personalities and outlets that should be avoided because of the inevitable muck that will dilute or even make the point moot.
Sure
And to be more ‘nuanced’ I was saying why I would put no value on anything coming from a TC interview- not that no one else could find said value
 

kcirdor

Still Clackin
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
19,611
Reaction score
9,066
Offline
LOL, TuckerMerkins, got the Carlson treatment and then equates it to a battle. So it wasn't even a discussion to begin with I see. Just an example of "my team's point of view is the only point of view."
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
40,493
Reaction score
29,402
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
I’d argue corrective lenses not blinders
But that’s a major premise of media literacy, there is no ‘raw data’ in broadcast media - everything is rehearsed, scripted, edited, et al
I’m not saying there is no value to what you see/hear, but it must be understood that’s it’s all engineered

The great benefit of Jon Stewart (and Colbert and Oliver, et al) is they’re at least honest about their dishonesty
My responsibility to myself would be wearing the same corrective lenses if I was watching Rachel Maddow interview a metoo survivor or the like

But as far as Carlson, when Jon Stewart spanked him on his own show decades ago; JS was spot on and TC has done nothing but get substantially worse - he provides no value to the national discourse, but does poison
Of course there's "raw data" in broadcast media. That's not only obvious, but fundamental in journalism. The question and issue is in how that data is distilled. It's not all that different from how people interpret the same data differently. Different outlets are going to interpret that "raw data" differently. This is part of the reason you see people who hate what MSM has become still acknowledge that the "hard news" segments of the CNNs, FNCs and NBCs of the world are actually decent. The problem arises when you have obviously biased and slanted segments that are essentially the opinion sections of the newspaper.

As awful as Carlson is, there are interviews worth watching, not because of anything Carlson, but rather because you can at least get an idea of where the guest is coming from. So the value in the segment is derived from the guest and not the host.

Ultimately, to each his own. I haven't watched Tucker or much of anything from MSM outside of the occasional breaking news. Talk shows are 80%-90% junk. Just not worth my time.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
68,267
Reaction score
116,117
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
Of course there's "raw data" in broadcast media. That's not only obvious, but fundamental in journalism. The question and issue is in how that data is distilled. It's not all that different from how people interpret the same data differently. Different outlets are going to interpret that "raw data" differently. This is part of the reason you see people who hate what MSM has become still acknowledge that the "hard news" segments of the CNNs, FNCs and NBCs of the world are actually decent. The problem arises when you have obviously biased and slanted segments that are essentially the opinion sections of the newspaper.

As awful as Carlson is, there are interviews worth watching, not because of anything Carlson, but rather because you can at least get an idea of where the guest is coming from. So the value in the segment is derived from the guest and not the host.

Ultimately, to each his own. I haven't watched Tucker or much of anything from MSM outside of the occasional breaking news. Talk shows are 80%-90% junk. Just not worth my time.
I was talking ‘raw data’ from the viewers pov
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom