Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/14/2017 9:33:59 PM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


the correct name of the author is David Harsanyi


2 posted on 12/14/2017 9:36:51 PM PST by Kaslin (Quid est Veritas?: What Is Truth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

was listening to a conversation the other day- two liberals talking actually, i believe- and the news was playing in the background, and one kept turning to listen to it- and the other piped up and said “Nope- can’t stand listening to the news anymore- it’s not news any longer- it’s like listening to the national enquirer- everything is made up’

I about dropped over- So maybe there’s a little hope that even liberals might be getting sick of the lack of news integrity these days?


3 posted on 12/14/2017 9:39:28 PM PST by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Succinct summary. Bookmarking.


5 posted on 12/14/2017 10:31:01 PM PST by Chad N. Freud (FR is the modern equivalent of the Committees of Correspondence. Let other analogies arise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Maybe the problem is that too many people are working backward from a preconception.

Maybe journalists should take courses on scientific method. Scientists are trained to use the known facts to develop contrasting hypotheses, including the null hypothesis, about what could be happening, and then they gather data which will support or invalidate the hypothesis. A hypothesis and its corresponding null will often be stated in the format, "If A is true, then we will observe B. If A is not true, then we will observe C." And if we observe neither B nor C, then we go back to the drawing board and rethink the hypotheses.

Journalists, in taking a preconception, cherry-pick only data that will support the preconception, while ignoring everything else. And they are incredibly easy to dupe, since they are primed to believe any claim that supports the preconception, even if no verifiable supporting evidence exists.

Often they will attempt to do this by contrasting their track record on truth with that of Donald Trump. Yes, Trump is a fabulist. His tweets can be destructive.

I wonder if the author of this piece even follows Trump's tweets? I have never seen where Trump fabricates anything. Mostly, he talks about the events of the day and praises people and groups for the great work they are doing towards MAGA. Sometimes, he criticizes biased journalists, criticism that is wholly deserved. I love when he calls out the journalists--I've been frustrated by watching journalists get away with lies and with destroying people and businesses for decades, and here, finally, is someone with enough backbone to stand up to their lies and deceit, instead of caving like most conservatives do.

7 posted on 12/15/2017 5:04:35 AM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson