Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Global Warming
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 9:01 am 
BigBrunyon wrote:
The best source always seems to be the one you're agreeing with the most. That's how it always is for me at least.
True enough.

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 10:01 am 
Parked Out wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
As someone that reads a range of sources: FoxNews, Al Jazeera, HAARETZ, NYT , Mumbai Mirror and more, yeah I'm the one in an echo chamber.
If the sources you expose yourself to lead you to think that MSNBC is politically neutral then yeah you're the one in the echo chamber. Pew Study Finds MSNBC the Most Opinionated Cable News Channel By Far "If you're like most cable news viewers, you probably think the channel you favor has a monopoly on the facts and the other ones are nothing more than a bunch of ranting. In fact, which cable network is the most opinionated is not a matter of opinion. It's MSNBC." https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/03/18/pew-study-finds-msnbc-the-most-opinionated-cable-news-channel-by-far/#404b09d65f8c https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/02/26/msnbc-shakes-up-programming-strategy/msnbc2-25-2015/
Strange, I never mentioned MSNBC as a source, nor did I assert that any news source is unbiased. My strategy is to read from a wide range of sources to form a more complete picture. One of my observations is that much of the bias lies in WHAT is covered. E.g. When Pelosi says something stupid, FoxNews covers this extensively. When Trump tweets a doozie CNN invites panels to discuss it. I find the coverage on Al Jazeera's particularly enlightening in they often address issues I've never heard of previously. As far a MSNBC being the most biased -- I assume that's because they didn't include The Huffington Post in their study, cause that's some really slanted coverage and a media organization that will undoubtedly lose tons of views once the Tweeter in chief is no longer in office (Whether in 2021 or 2025)

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 10:17 am 
RandyHiker wrote:
Strange, I never mentioned MSNBC as a source, nor did I assert that any news source is unbiased.
Ruh roh, somebody's hacked your account:
RandyHiker wrote:
One of the great propaganda victories of the late 20th and 21st centuries is convincing huge numbers people that the "mainstream media" is leftist. MSNBC , CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc are large corporations intent on making a profit and protecting their governing board's financial interests.

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 10:37 am 
Parked Out wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
Strange, I never mentioned MSNBC as a source, nor did I assert that any news source is unbiased.
Ruh roh, somebody's hacked your account:
RandyHiker wrote:
One of the great propaganda victories of the late 20th and 21st centuries is convincing huge numbers people that the "mainstream media" is leftist. MSNBC , CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc are large corporations intent on making a profit and protecting their governing board's financial interests.
Fine, I mentioned in a prior post. Where do I assert that MSNBC is unbiased? MSNBC is "leftist" only with respect to sources like FoxNews. MSNBC is still a corporate entity advancing an agenda invested in maintaining the status quo. They very much depend on the petty bickering of the current news cycle. Give me an example of a media outlet in USA that is strong proponent of trade unions. Then we can discuss a "leftist" media outlet.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 11:09 am 
RandyHiker wrote:
Fine, I mentioned in a prior post. Where do I assert that MSNBC is unbiased?
Your implication was that they can't be leftist because they're owned by and answer to a corporation.
RandyHiker wrote:
MSNBC is "leftist" only with respect to sources like FoxNews.
Even the New York Times sees MSNBC as being too biased: The New York Times Is Reportedly Asking Its Reporters Not to Appear on The Rachel Maddow Show https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/the-new-york-times-is-reportedly-asking-its-reporters-not-to-appear-on-the-rachel-maddow-show/404256/
Quote:
Give me an example of a media outlet in USA that is strong proponent of trade unions. Then we can discuss a "leftist" media outlet.
The Left keeps getting lefter...
Left-right divide
Left-right divide

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 11:35 am 
Parked Out wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
Fine, I mentioned in a prior post. Where do I assert that MSNBC is unbiased?
Your implication was that they can't be leftist because they're owned by and answer to a corporation.
RandyHiker wrote:
MSNBC is "leftist" only with respect to sources like FoxNews.
Even the New York Times sees MSNBC as being too biased: The New York Times Is Reportedly Asking Its Reporters Not to Appear on The Rachel Maddow Show https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/the-new-york-times-is-reportedly-asking-its-reporters-not-to-appear-on-the-rachel-maddow-show/404256/
Quote:
Give me an example of a media outlet in USA that is strong proponent of trade unions. Then we can discuss a "leftist" media outlet.
The Left keeps getting lefter...
Left-right divide
Left-right divide
It's only because the current perspective has shifted so far to the right that even small measures to adjust the power balance between the wealthiest 400 families in the USA and the rest of us is considered radical. E.g. The $15 minimum wage proposal is controversial. But realistically $15 is really still just scraping by. A more radical proposal would be imposing a 15% tariff on all domestic output produced by non-union labor and 50% tariff on imported items produced by non-union labor. Those are "leftist" ideas. But they are so far out of "mainstream" thinking that it's not even a topic of conversation. And you dodged my challenge:
Quote:
Give me an example of a media outlet in USA that is strong proponent of trade unions. Then we can discuss a "leftist" media outlet.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 11:36 am 
Parked Out wrote:
Tom wrote:
You can find extremists on every issue making statements that provide for good conspiracy theory fodder.
Well I'm encouraged that you refer to George Monbiot as an extremist. He seems to me about middle of the road for progressives these days but I'm no expert. Most if not all of what you read in The Guardian on climate reflects his worldview.
Tom wrote:
This does not make for a conspiracy. I don't believe he is saying: goal: overthrow capitalism how: exaggerate AGW.
You're the one calling it a conspiracy and then arguing against conspiracies, but traditionally doesn't that term imply some sort of secret plotting? I'm just pointing out what they're saying in public. You said earlier, "To believe the left is using AGW as a tool to reallocate wealth or whatever the conspiracy might be I find almost comical..." Did you catch AOC's earlier statement that the world's going to end in 12 years if we don't stop climate change? And have you seen her little Green New Deal video? Any hints at reallocating wealth in there?
Yes, there is a graphic in there regarding $. Per investopedia:
Quote:
The Green New Deal resolution doesn't mention how the U.S. government, which has $22 trillion of debt, would pay for it. Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman has said the plan may slow the economy by adding to the debt and even drive jobs overseas. "Instead of the Green New Deal, the federal government could adopt a revenue-neutral carbon tax to decrease emissions without exacerbating the fiscal imbalance," said Jeffrey Miron, the Director of economic studies at the Cato Institute. Edward B. Barbier, the American economics professor who wrote the report that formed the basis of the UN's Green New Deal, said that, instead of deficit funding, the government should use revenues that come from dismantled subsidies and environmental taxes. On the other hand, Ocasio-Cortez has told CBS's "60 Minutes" that "people are going to have to start paying their fair share in taxes" to pay for the Green New Deal and suggested tax rates of 60% to 70% for the very wealthy.
A tool is a device that aids in accomplishing a task. The task is reduce emissions and to pay for it there is wealth reallocation. What is the conspiracy? Mitigating AGW is the task not the tool. The conspiracy would be to distort it such that it becomes the tool and wealth reallocation (or something else) the task. I am not surprised the left would suggest the rich pay more in the solution. Does not make it a conspiracy. If you believe there is a conspiracy feel free to lay it out.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 1:57 pm 
Tom wrote:
What is the conspiracy? Mitigating AGW is the task not the tool. The conspiracy would be to distort it such that it becomes the tool and wealth reallocation (or something else) the task. I am not surprised the left would suggest the rich pay more in the solution. Does not make it a conspiracy. If you believe there is a conspiracy feel free to lay it out.
To return to the original post on the subject, Chakrabarti said, "it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all ... we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing." So then who's lying - AOC or Chakrabarti? You must assume Chakrabarti is lying, otherwise mitigating AGW is the tool, and it seems the GND would fit your description of a conspiracy pretty nicely.

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 2:50 pm 
The NY Post article gives more context around those statements. I read it as reference to their origins, not necessarily the Green New Deal. In the comment you didn't quote it's clearer they are talking about the origins of the Brand New Congress movement:
Quote:
“Yeah,” said Ricketts. Then he said: “No.” Then he said: “I think it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s dual. It is both rising to the challenge that is existential around climate and it is building an economy that contains more prosperity. More sustainability in that prosperity — and more broadly shared prosperity, equitability and justice throughout.”
Quote:
In the spring of 2016 — even before Sanders conceded the primary race — Chakrabarti, Exley and other Sanders organizers, including Alexandra Rojas and Corbin Trent, were thinking of next steps for the movement. To enact change, they reasoned, it was vital to transform Congress. They formed a group called Brand New Congress with the mission to recruit hundreds of community leaders and working-class candidates to run on a vision of getting corporate money out of politics, tackling climate change, transforming the economy, providing health care for all, standing for racial justice and stemming mass incarceration... In the end, the project “was a spectacular failure,” Chakrabarti tells me, laughing...
I am guessing they plan to embrace controversy as part of their go big initiative, so expect more fodder going forward.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 3:24 pm 
Parked Out wrote:
So then who's lying - AOC or Chakrabarti?
They are both politicians right? The answer is both of course. All politicians speak with the intention of influencing the audience to support their agenda/candidacy. Of course they will emphasize what they want you to believe and avoid talking about anything that would diminish their case. You want to keep track of how frequently what they say is at odds with other sources of information and consequences of those differences. AOC is a perfect foil for FoxNews as she hits so many fear buttons of a preponderance of FoxNew viewership. Rep. Omar hits a few more, but doesn't seem generate the same level of coverage, perhaps because she isn't as outspoken. I'm not sure your post is back on topic or if your are just trying to change the subject because you can't think of any examples of actually leftist media mainstream or otherwise.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 3:48 pm 
Back on subject would be climate change (1) is a hoax (2) can't be proven (3) real but (a) exaggerated (b) we'll adapt / survive (c) what is the solution?

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 3:50 pm 
Tom wrote:
The NY Post article gives more context around those statements. I read it as reference to their origins, not necessarily the Green New Deal. In the comment you didn't quote it's clearer they are talking about the origins of the Brand New Congress movement:
Apologists rush to the defense but there's really no context or backpedaling that's going to significantly change the meaning of what Chakrabarti said. And Randy says they're both liars so I'll leave it to you two to figure out.

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 3:54 pm 
RandyHiker wrote:
I'm not sure your post is back on topic or if your are just trying to change the subject because you can't think of any examples of actually leftist media mainstream or otherwise.
I provide data or references for 90% of my posts, Randy. When you start doing the same then I'll start taking your silly challenges more seriously.

John
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 4:06 pm 
I googled the comments before drawing conclusions as I wanted to read was said as opposed to select quotes and conclusions. The only article I found via google with additional context was the Washington Post article which I indicated earlier seemed to be more balanced. I am not surprised you choose to interpret as you do.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostSun Jul 14, 2019 4:57 pm 
Parked Out wrote:
I provide data or references for 90% of my posts, Randy. When you start doing the same then I'll start taking your silly challenges more seriously.
Apparently a sufficient case for challenge silliness is that you don't have an answer for it. Your first response was to post some data about increasing polarization of primary congressional candidates, including the fact that the Democrats have gotten more progressive. That's interesting and all, but not really a response to providing an example of a media outlet with strong support for trade unions. MSNBC makes their money by sowing outrage, but doesn't actually advocate for progressive issues. E.g. When Rachel Maddow covered "right to work" legislation, she quotes economists that talk about how the numbers of jobs in "right to work" states has grown more rapidly. Number of jobs is one measure, but what about reductions in families qualifying for SNAP? That wasn't discussed. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/whats-the-deal-right-work Not much talk of federal legislation to superceed these anti-union states with federal laws protecting the right to unionize. South Carolina has some of the roughest anti-union laws, which is why Boeing built a 787 final assembly line there. To give Boeing better bargaining power with the IAM https://www.goiam.org/news/solidarity-for-iam-members-at-boeing-south-carolina/ MSNBC is a big soapbox and they shout a lot, but they hardly espose an actually progressive agenda.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Global Warming
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum