The Swamp

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.

Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?

Dude, no.

WE GOT SOME MEDIA BIAS HERE

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:24 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.

Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?

People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.

Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.

Giff wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:29 pmDude, no.

For what it's worth, I have absolutely no problem with anyone immigrating illegally. Half my family illegally immigrated from Yugoslavia to Austria.

My point is the absurdity of trying to rely on fact-based-ness as a standard of objectivity.

A lot can happen between a sentence fragment being a fact and a fact being journalistically responsible.

serrano wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:31 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:24 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.

Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?

People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.

Eta: I know that my statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The “illegal immigrant” term is now clickbait, full stop.

eta: 2 for clarification.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:33 pm

Giff wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:29 pmDude, no.

For what it's worth, I have absolutely no problem with anyone immigrating illegally. Half my family illegally immigrated from Yugoslavia to Austria.

My point is the absurdity of trying to rely on fact-based-ness as a standard of objectivity.

I think the point there is that "illegal immigrants" is, you know....not the preferred nomenclature, dude.

brian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:38 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:33 pm

Giff wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:29 pmDude, no.

For what it's worth, I have absolutely no problem with anyone immigrating illegally. Half my family illegally immigrated from Yugoslavia to Austria.

My point is the absurdity of trying to rely on fact-based-ness as a standard of objectivity.

I think the point there is that "illegal immigrants" is, you know....not the preferred nomenclature, dude.

Yes, and I agree with that. But not because it isn't fact-based or "objective" in and of itself.

serrano wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:31 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:24 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.

Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?

People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.

Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.

Not to threadjack a threadjack, but why the nomenclature change when talking about slavery? Does “enslaved people” give a (completely accurate and justifiable) humanization to them, where “slaves” does not?

"What I'm saying is your wife has, uh, performed fellatio so in the literal sense, um, calling her a 'cocksucker' is indeed fact based."

heteronormative bias

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:47 pm

serrano wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:31 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:24 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:15 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:11 pm

That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.

What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?

As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.

The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.

FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.

Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?

People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.

Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.

Not to threadjack a threadjack, but why the nomenclature change when talking about slavery? Does “enslaved people” give a (completely accurate and justifiable) humanization to them, where “slaves” does not?

I’m not sure when I started to do this, but to me the term “enslaved people” or “persons” highlights the humanity of the person who is legally owned by another person. It might just help at least one student identify the people we are talking about in terms of their condition rather than their race. I try to use the term enslaver instead of master. I think language matters to some degree. Does it work? I don’t know, but it’s my classroom, so...

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:53 pm "What I'm saying is your wife has, uh, performed fellatio so in the literal sense, um, calling her a 'cocksucker' is indeed fact based."

Exactly my point. You can't judge whether something is okay by whether it's fact based.

Faucci is having his first presser with the Biden administration and he looks so much more relaxed and calm and is speaking freely..

so what do we call immigrants who broke the law while either entering the country or overstayed their visas.

I"ll hang up and listen for your opinion.

I'm assuming this won't warrant its own thread, but QAnon nutter Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene filed Articles of Impeachment against President Biden. Wheeee!!!!

I mean... So what?

You can file all you want, doesn't mean anyone has to do anything about it.

They should censure her immediately for that bullshit.

If I were the social media type, I'd be all over filming a video in a basement with all kinds of stupid shit like this.

"I've recently filed to incorporate my dog. We'll see how it goes."

"I've recently filed my taxes. We'll see how it goes."

"I've recently gone to the post office (Bernie Meme). We'll see how it goes."

The path forward is nicely summarized in one sentence here:

He's had a great 30 hours. No complaints at all.

elflaco2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 4:42 pm so what do we call immigrants who broke the law while either entering the country or overstayed their visas.

I"ll hang up and listen for your opinion.

First, innocent until proven guilty. Second, undocumented persons.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:13 pm I mean... So what?

You can file all you want, doesn't mean anyone has to do anything about it.

I know there is no chance of anything coming out of this, just pointing out the nuttiness Trumpism unleashed.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:09 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:13 pm I mean... So what?

You can file all you want, doesn't mean anyone has to do anything about it.

I know there is no chance of anything coming out of this, just pointing out the nuttiness Trumpism unleashed.

I believe she is saving herself.. IMO with the FBI looking at Parler now and it's effect on January 6th riot I believe it's going to come out her and Laura Boebert had involvement and they will be thrown out of congress. In that case she will say her ejection was do to her impeachment of Biden.

She's just trolling and owning the libz. There's no 4d chess here.

I mean... Good luck with that?

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:00 pm He's had a great 30 hours. No complaints at all.

Plenty of complaints on my FB feed and from FoxNews. My favorite theme is Biden destroying unity because of Jen Psaki's pressers. Several Fox segments blaming Biden because the press is asking Psaki softballs and being nice while she treats them respectfully. My favorite was a panel with Matt Schlapp and some Liberal woman where they showed 2 softball questions then showed 4 cherry picked questions from 4 years and the host saying, "see? Look at how differently the press treats Biden. This is proof that Biden's calls for unity is a lie." So many things wrong... The Liberal couldn't stop laughing at the two idiots saying "are we on another planet right now?"

Meanwhile, my moron cousin's almost as dumb kid is freaking out that Biden prevented Trump's border wall from completing out of spite. They were just 350 miles away from finishing the wall, and all the materials purchased, but Biden is destroying the country so Trump can't claim a victory in building the wall.

"Just" 350 miles?

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 4:42 pm I'm assuming this won't warrant its own thread, but QAnon nutter Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene filed Articles of Impeachment against President Biden. Wheeee!!!!

And this may not be nothing right now, but 2022 is my fear.. The dems can lose the house in 2022 as they lost several seats this past election, but they can pick up 3 Senate seats in Wisky, PA, and NC.

Is that dude serious about “preventing pandemics”?

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:15 pm Is that dude serious about “preventing pandemics”?

I mean, kinda? That's what the team in place was trying to do and was doing before Trump disbanded it.

It was fun while it lasted:

Can't mix memes like this.

Maybe I’m a big dummy, but I thought they were like hurricanes where you plan and mitigate harm but you can’t prevent.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:51 pm Maybe I’m a big dummy, but I thought they were like hurricanes where you plan and mitigate harm but you can’t prevent.

I don’t see why not. Pay attention to outbreaks and react quickly to stop them from spreading to become pandemic. Maybe you can’t stop all of them, but some?

Isn’t that what happened with Ebola?