the general sub forum keeps the rest of the forum technical
Ideally the whole forum would be technical
BUT
some times people just have to vent or share things they have found my bet would be that such things would spill over in to the rest of the forum with out this sub forum

this sub forum is a good place to hang out while waiting for questions asked to be answered

Lionel Nation - What You Need to Know About Assad, Syria, Chemical Attacks and Potential Military Action
I bet it was the FSA/rebels. I am not saying that to be edgy or ironic.

Right, a Clinton mouthpiece gets a Pulitzer prize for outstanding journalism. *claps slowly*

H.A. Goodman - PULITZER PRIZE GIVEN TO NEW YORK TIMES WASHINGTON POST FOR ANTI-TRUMP RUSSIA COVERAGE

RT America - CNN's Jake Tapper uses child to promote Syrian agenda

Rachel Maddow dedicates 53% of show to Russia hysteria

Hi Jeebizz... just one question... Have you actually watched CNN and felt that they used a child to promote ana agenda, or have you seen this first on RT and just felt that you we're right all along about CNN.

I mean, you can't say main stream media and ignore Fox News and RT yet you seem not to have a problem to them and even not fact check them. Not to mention random people on the youtube which quite frankly have sketchy logic and are probably to stupid to be journalists or to lazy to get some other kind of work and have tomich free time (which is really a low bar for them to begin with). Now I'm not acussing you of anything, but are you sure you're not just a bit misguided in your hatred?

CNN is just blatant.

I don't like FOX either, or NBC/MSNBC, ABC, CBS - just CNN happens to be the bigger target right now.
Well RT now has a special place in my heart, since Clinton likes to blame her troubles on that - and CNN likes to attack RT too. I am well aware about RT, but the media in the US is that bad that I have to resort to RT. BBC seems to be circling the drain more and more sadly.

I suppose you haven't really watched any of the youtubers I have posted. Most do not even have a journalism degree, but I would rather hear their analysis over what any of the bigger medias have to say. Their logic does not seem to be sketchy at all - unless you think that pointing out what traditional media will not cover, or will skew. Yes, The Rageaholic's 'logic' sure is skewed because he calls bullshit on the so-called latest Syria gas attacks. I'll just believe what I am told about 'courageous' and 'noble' White Helmets in Syria............................................................................................... .

Nope .

I feel like CNN, like all media is just after scandals and ratings... don't really see the differences.

As for Syria.. that'sa complicated matter and no one news team or one guy can say 'this is the truth'... Luckly sometimes news media use phrases like 'Syria has been accused of' and 'there are reports stating that'... which in this case.. quite frankly I remember Vice news reporting stuff like this since 2012 or 2013. But I might just remember incorectly..

As for RT, I'm sorry but that a news organization sustained by Putin... the guy that said his millitary wasn't involved in Crimeea and then congratulated his soldiers for a job well done... so you know... I simply refuse to belive anything from there without at least two additionak trusted sources.

As for the youtube guys... well, the thing is that you could make up your mind without them.. you have the same experience as them... sure, you might have an actual life that doesn't involve doing nothing all day but whatch CNN and expect for their bullshit (and when you expect something, you ussually see it even if there or not)... The point is most of the linked persons have sketchy points of views and make extreme links based on something they previosly choose to belive rather than simple facts... Also, when there's a warin Syria and political havoc around it and you're worried about what CNN said, well, maybe your priorities aren't quite right (or are simply imposed)...

Quite frankly, just my friendly advice (and I might be wrong).. but I think it would be sanner for you to start watching TV more and stop whatching these guys on youtube... than again, maybe I'm just ignorant...

If you see any of the media on TV, it is already spun like it was the Syrian forces.

Again if it has come to this point I'll take Putin's word, and since you brought up Crimea - historically it was always Russian - it was theirs to take back, deal with it. I like how Ukraine is made out to be the victim - but again lets ignore the ever encroachment closer to Russia's borders by NATO - never mind that it was agreed no such expansion would occur post USSR collapse. You do not read or hear anyone on traditional media bring that up, RT does - google it for yourself, is RT lying on that? What was the agreement between NATO and Russian Federation post USSR? I have already posted my reasons and I am not going to go back again, feel free to search my other posts about NATO, Ukraine, buffer states etc.

Sketchy in what way? Because either some use profanities in their videos, or ....? A simple google search can confirm/disprove anything. I do not expect everyone let alone anyone to believe the videos I linked, but given from where things keep going, I would rather take their words over those who have 'journalism' degrees at this point. Look into Tim Pool also.

Thanks for the laughs

No I do not think so - I do however get the impression that you still have some sort of foot into the traditional media, thats fine - but youtube is the very antithesis of what regular TV is. A youtuber with little or no budget offers more valuable entertainment, and now even better journalism than big budget productions. Youtube is raw and I prefer it that way. The fact also that as you pointed out these youtubers I have linked to have 'sketchy' views is actually incorrect. It is not sketchy it is more realistic and unfiltered , they are not beholden to anyone but their fans (unless they made the mistake of taking 'ad-sense.') Perhaps you see their conclusions as sketchy because it is not santised, well I like that. I never stated I totally agree 100% with any of them, but in terms of OVERALL credibility, skill of analysis - I'll take them over any of the bigger outlets.

Btw, here's something that I really like...Just ignore the title... the disscussion is not about Trump.

https://youtu.be/yKr6zRht0jg

To quote: "people want to know who's side you're one before they decide if what you say is funny or good or right".

That video pretty much touches upon points that are correct, primarily political correctness. This is also a good one:

Lionel Nation - The Epic Fraud of Woodward and Bernstein and Alt-Left Fake News White House Correspondents

You shouldn't take any source ... "media" or otherwise ... at face value. Every one is both trying to inform you and to influence you.

- - -

You also shouldn't compare present events to Watergate. "Tricky Dick" basically was a jerk, and the media still congratulates itself for pushing him out of office even though he didn't particularly do anything wrong. (Certainly not by present standards.)

Still, I tire of media outlets that still continue to refuse to accept what really did happen last November. Even if they disbelieve who is the Officeholder, what about the Office, itself? It's time to give up the idea that somehow "Madame President" is going to be swept in – she isn't. And, it's time to give up on the notion that this is actually what the American people now want – it isn't.

The Press is accustomed to being king-makers – arbiters of the public persona of every public official, most especially at the very top. But, they really don't know how to handle this President, and this just may be why the people picked him.

Yes they all have biases - but at least the less orthodox (corporate) media make it a point to TELL you that they have some biases. You will never hear that from the big 6.

- - -

Maybe it is worse than Watergate who knows, but the old guard is still trying to somehow fit the big bad Russians into it.

I mentioned this in the Syria thread, and I will do the same here; it seems that the old guard now would gladly burn the whole house down because they backed the wrong horse. You see this on Rachel Maddow on MSNBC where majority of her segments were dedicated to Russia - and was approving of more NATO troops being placed on Russia's border. So yes, lets provoke Russia because Madame Cyberhack didn't get her way - that is the media part, and of course in the government are doing the same thing - "muh Russia" - Mccain, Cheney......

Oh they are just beside themselves with butthurt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfAePQ2R6h0 - well you have to give it to President Trump on this - either go to the WH Correspondence Dinner, or hold a rally in a recently flipped state that was blue for 30 years. Old guard media is losing to everything, from guerrilla-style journalism, and unfiltered commentary and analysis. Again, Youtubers like Mr. Goodman that have crowd funding like Patreon - are NOT beholden to any corporate entity - hence they are free to talk about anything they wish, this is the threat to them. People are giving their money directly to a person - not an entity.

Same for entertainment side of things. I would rather watch someone with a webcam or semi-professional camera and production create whatever - that is much more entertaining, of value, and not pandering to like what you see on 'good old media.' I can either still choose to watch some vapid un-"reality" show - or watch some guy with a webcam eat and critique an MRE. Well I choose the latter, because it is not manufactured dreck; it is actually more entertaining anyways, and holds up way better than a show costing millions sponsored by your corporate overlords.

I don't get it... since when has journalism equal 'a guy telling you what he thinks'?

In fact isn't that exactly the problem with the main stream.. that they are now exactly just trying to do that and forgot about journalism... So why would the solution for this be praising morons like Mr. Goodman for acting the exact same way (I'm sorry but the guy is simply a moron -- if you don't see it, I'm shocked)?

I'm really in doubt on all this... I mean, Jeebizz, your answer to me saying that Putin attacked another country, lied to everyone and annexed a part of it was completely biased (and made no sense)... doesn't that seem a result of the influencers you're watching and doesn't that scare you at all?

Furthermore, there is "the thing that never makes the news: context."

The media focuses on one story-line and tries to turn it into something that will "sell newspapers" (specifically: "advertising") for an extended period of time. They don't cover any other stories – even nearby. So, unless you actively look, you don't hear, as Paul Harvey (RIP) used to say, "the rest of the story."

For example, the mainstream is focusing obsessively on: "Russia, again." Because Russia hacked the election and that's why "Madame Presidente" was declared the loser when she really, secretly, won and so we need to declare a special state of emergency and install her and ... and ... and ... but, I digress.

"Russia is the story." Putin's just like Stalin. "Duck and Cover." World War III is about to break out any minute and it's Trump who's doing it which is why we need to declare a special state of emergency and install her and ... and ... and ... but, I digress. Again.

You get the idea.