• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

North Korea Nuclear Ready

HuskyDeac said:
Actually it's fake news. Their source's source didn't discuss that. They said they imagined them discussing it. Poor journalism.
Click to expand...

Fake news typically doesn't debunk itself. The real news is what was quoted in the article. The headline was an exaggeration.

“A conversation I had with a very prominent Republican today, who literally was saying that they imagine Gen. Kelly and Secretary Mattis have had conversations that if Trump lunged for the nuclear football, what would they do?” Sherman told NBC’s Chris Hayes. “Would they tackle him? I mean literally, physically restrain him from putting the country at perilous risk.”
“That is the kind of situation we’re in,” Sherman added.
Pressed by Hayes to explain the sources’ relationship to—and direct knowledge of—the Trump administration, Sherman explained, “these are the conversation they have, on very good authority, are taking place inside the White House.”
Click to expand...

A Republican source used hyperbole to express the doubt in the President. Now you can question whether or not that's truly newsworthy, but it is an accurate reporting of what was said on MSNBC.

This isn't an example of fake news. It's an example of "telephone journalism." Much of what we read on news aggregator sites is third or fourth hand reporting. The message is obscured or diluted.
 
PhDeac said:
Fake news typically doesn't debunk itself. The real news is what was quoted in the article. The headline was an exaggeration.



A Republican source used hyperbole to express the doubt in the President. Now you can question whether or not that's truly newsworthy, but it is an accurate reporting of what was said on MSNBC.

This isn't an example of fake news. It's an example of "telephone journalism." Much of what we read on news aggregator sites is third or fourth hand reporting. The message is obscured or diluted.
Click to expand...

But, in my view, that’s a big problem. The headline writer just gave the fake news mantra more ammunition. It’s irresponsible.
 
PhDeac said:
Fake news typically doesn't debunk itself. The real news is what was quoted in the article. The headline was an exaggeration.



A Republican source used hyperbole to express the doubt in the President. Now you can question whether or not that's truly newsworthy, but it is an accurate reporting of what was said on MSNBC.

This isn't an example of fake news. It's an example of "telephone journalism." Much of what we read on news aggregator sites is third or fourth hand reporting. The message is obscured or diluted.
Click to expand...

Their title was false, Kelly and Mattis didn't "literally discuss tackling Trump". That's a bullshit fake headline to draw readers. It's like publishing a knowingly fake story and later putting a correction on page 13.
 
HuskyDeac said:
Their title was false, Kelly and Mattis didn't "literally discuss tackling Trump". That's a bullshit fake headline to draw readers. It's like publishing a knowingly fake story and later putting a correction on page 13.
Click to expand...

Exhibit A.
 
birdman said:
But, in my view, that’s a big problem. The headline writer just gave the fake news mantra more ammunition. It’s irresponsible.
Click to expand...

Definitely. That's why I try not to link Raw Story while these board assholes link Daily Caller and Breitbart.

Husky is trying to build a false equivalency between something like this and the Seth Rich bullshit the Fox News parroted for a full week. There's bad and there's worse. They're not the same.
 
PhDeac said:
Definitely. That's why I try not to link Raw Story while these board assholes link Daily Caller and Breitbart.

Husky is trying to build a false equivalency between something like this and the Seth Rich bullshit the Fox News parroted for a full week. There's bad and there's worse. They're not the same.
Click to expand...

I’ve observed that phdeac has shifted ever so slightly into angry

That’s ok by me. Just a curious and subtle move.
 
PhDeac said:
Definitely. That's why I try not to link Raw Story while these board assholes link Daily Caller and Breitbart.

Husky is trying to build a false equivalency between something like this and the Seth Rich bullshit the Fox News parroted for a full week. There's bad and there's worse. They're not the same.
Click to expand...

The real problem is that Husky is not the only one trying to (successfully I might add) build that false equivalency.
 
birdman said:
The headline is sensationalist. The actual quote from the high level unnamed source was “A conversation I had with a very prominent Republican today, who literally was saying that they imagine Gen. Kelly and Secretary Mattis have had conversations that if Trump lunged for the nuclear football, what would they do?” So the source was saying that they imagine Mattis and Kelley have had that conversation. Trump has very effectively question the credibility of the entire new media and this kind of headline writing irresponsibly gives Trump ammunition.
Click to expand...

The tweet is false and misleading. Fake.

The headline on the site [GOP official imagines Kelly and Mattis discussed tackling Trump in the event he ‘lunges for the nuclear football’: report] seems accurate. Not sure if the headline has changed.
 
ConnorEl said:
The tweet is false and misleading. Fake.

The headline on the site [GOP official imagines Kelly and Mattis discussed tackling Trump in the event he ‘lunges for the nuclear football’: report] seems accurate. Not sure if the headline has changed.
Click to expand...

I don’t have a screen cap, but I’m fairly certain the title has been edited.
 
birdman said:
I don’t have a screen cap, but I’m fairly certain the title has been edited.
Click to expand...

You can tell by the url:

.rawstory.com/2017/10/kelly-and-mattis-discussed-literally-tackling-trump-in-the-event-he-lunges-for-the-nuclear-football-report
 
PhDeac said:
Definitely. That's why I try not to link Raw Story while these board assholes link Daily Caller and Breitbart.

Husky is trying to build a false equivalency between something like this and the Seth Rich bullshit the Fox News parroted for a full week. There's bad and there's worse. They're not the same.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to compare this article with anything. I was just pointing out they completely misrepresented the story in the title, which is appears they have since fixed (good for them). It's poor journalism and the reason reputable sources are under attack is because people are treating these clickbait companies as if they're legit journalism.
 
HuskyDeac said:
I wasn't trying to compare this article with anything. I was just pointing out they completely misrepresented the story in the title, which is appears they have since fixed (good for them). It's poor journalism and the reason reputable sources are under attack is because people are treating these clickbait companies as if they're legit journalism.
Click to expand...

The way you initially phrased it, it looked like you were buying the Trump fake news narrative. But, this post gets at the core problem with the initial headline and verbiage in the Tweet. This kind of hyperbolic headline writing is not in the same league as Pizzagate fake news, but Trump and his supports are equating the two and in the process completely undermining faith in journalism. Trump's manipulation of our faith in journalism is one of the scariest things about his candidacy and presidency. It is really problematic when "news" organizations play right into his game with bad articles like this one and even worse headlines. Sure, maybe it's news that some one said that some one else said that they think some other guys probably talk about an extreme scenario, but it was falsely presented and hyped for revenue purposes. That headline and tweet (which has now maybe been deleted) was probably shared around the internet 1000's of times and most of the people that saw it will never check back into see if it was revised for accuracy. I personally think it is dangerous to down play the seriousness of the intentionally misleading headline and the fact that it give fodder to any attacks on legitimate journalism.
 
birdman said:
The way you initially phrased it, it looked like you were buying the Trump fake news narrative. But, this post gets at the core problem with the initial headline and verbiage in the Tweet. This kind of hyperbolic headline writing is not in the same league as Pizzagate fake news, but Trump and his supports are equating the two and in the process completely undermining faith in journalism. Trump's manipulation of our faith in journalism is one of the scariest things about his candidacy and presidency. It is really problematic when "news" organizations play right into his game with bad articles like this one and even worse headlines. Sure, maybe it's news that some one said that some one else said that they think some other guys probably talk about an extreme scenario, but it was falsely presented and hyped for revenue purposes. That headline and tweet (which has now maybe been deleted) was probably shared around the internet 1000's of times and most of the people that saw it will never check back into see if it was revised for accuracy. I personally think it is dangerous to down play the seriousness of the intentionally misleading headline and the fact that it give fodder to any attacks on legitimate journalism.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%. I don't buy anything Trump is selling, but I can see how crappy journalism fuels his narrative.
 
HuskyDeac said:
I agree with this 100%. I don't buy anything Trump is selling, but I can see how crappy journalism fuels his narrative.
Click to expand...

and I can see how people who have like 100 liberal political twitter follows lap it up.
 
I kind of hate twitter journalism because it doesn't have the same fact checking infrastructure and long-term record of credibility that traditional journalism. Nonetheless, this tweet is worrisome:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top