On Oct 5, 2026 at 2:50:28 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/5/2026 3:32 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-05 11:16 a.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 10:10 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-04 5:10 p.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 2:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 4, 2026 at 8:45:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/4/2026 5:02 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 3, 2026 at 6:56:15 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 6:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Whatever bias that may be, the only relevant question is are >>>>>>>>> their numbers
On Oct 3, 2026 at 3:05:31 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 4:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:"A Media Research Center review of CNN, MSNBC, and PBS >>>>>>>>>>> newscasts from 21
On Oct 3, 2026 at 12:40:42 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 10/3/2026 1:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 3, 2026 at 10:09:26 AM PDT, "Rhino" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>The question isn't whether they're wrong, the question
wrote:
Leo Kearse shares the news of how far left mediaNotice how the BBC has no trouble throwing around
outlets like the BBC
are spinning the news of the hijacking and working
the "far
right" into
the story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LpOoI4IsXU [5
minutes]
There is simply no limit on how the leftist media
will try to
cover for
their friends in the Red-Green Alliance and attack
Israel.
the label
"far Right"
but
they never refer to the UK government (or anyone
else, for that
matter) as
"far Left" no matter how far to the left they are.
Same here in America. We're constantly told by the
legacy corporate
media
that
various conservative pundits and politicians are
"far Right", but they
never
label anyone "far left", even the new crop of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communists like
Mamdani and
Bass, and Raman who are being elected in deep blue
cities. What does
someone
actually have to do to get CNN to call them "far
Left"?
According to Google's AI, CNN calls these Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'far right':
• Nick Fuentes: Described by CNN as a far-right
streamer and
internet
personality.
• Ivan Raiklin: Identified in CNN reporting as a
far- right activist
and figure promoting political "retribution" lists and
conspiracy
theories regarding the January 6 Capitol attack. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> • Alex Jones: Referred to by CNN as a far-right
radio host and
conspiracy theorist.
Are they wrong? (I know only Jones, and only from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sandy Hook.)
is why don't they
consistently (or ever) apply converse "far Left" labels
to those who
qualify?
Google's AI again. CNN calls these 'far-left': >>>>>>>>>>>>
• Hasan Piker: A prominent progressive online >>>>>>>>>>>> streamer and political
commentator whom CNN and other political analysts >>>>>>>>>>>> frequently identify as
a leading voice and amplifier for the far-left and >>>>>>>>>>>> democratic socialist
wing of the party.
• Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and >>>>>>>>>>>> affiliated local
political candidates (such as New York figures like Zohran
Mamdani and
Claire Valdez), who run on platforms advocating for social
democracy,
universal healthcare, and heavy taxation of corporate wealth.
• David Hogg and his political action organization
Leaders We
Deserve, which CNN has noted targets moderate or >>>>>>>>>>>> establishment
Democratic incumbents in primary challenges to promote a >>>>>>>>>>>> younger, more
left-leaning generation of leadership.
January to 21 June 2025 (the period covering Mamdani's >>>>>>>>>>> primary rise) found
those networks used “far-right” or similar labels 1,222
times and
“far-left”
86 times. Across the three, Democrats were called “far- >>>>>>>>>>> left” only once."
I was able to Google this:
"The Media Research Center (MRC) is transparent about
its bias. Its
homepage states (retrieved Dec. 8, 2022), "The mission of The >>>>>>>>>> Media
Research Center is to document and combat the falsehoods and >>>>>>>>>> censorship
of the news media, entertainment media and Big Tech in order >>>>>>>>>> to defend
and preserve America's founding principles and Judeo-Christian >>>>>>>>>> values."
wrong?
Well, where there's demonstrable (and, here, acknowledged) bias, you >>>>>>>> have to reserve certainty. Meanwhile, though, Google does say: >>>>>>>>
"Yes, CNN mentions "far-right" significantly more often than
"far-left.""
Okay, and since it's the far-Left that's significantly more
dangerous to life
and limb-- e.g., the far-Right has nothing on its resume comparable >>>>>>> to the
2020 celebration of Saint Floyd of Fentanyl (may peace be upon >>>>>>> him)-- this
sort of behavior by the media would make them not just wrong but a >>>>>>> threat to
the fabric of society.
The question (well, *a* question) is whether lopsided mentions might >>>>>> just owe to reader-attention. While it's true that both right and >>>>>> left have scary histories, Hitler is still the bogeyman de
résistance...
Hitler was indeed vile but Stalin and Mao killed far more of their >>>>> own people and Pol Pot killed a larger percentage of his own people >>>>> than either Hitler, Stalin or Mao. But the lion's share of
discussions of the worst monsters typically puts places Hitler as the >>>>> worst of the worst. That ignorance of reality has always felt
calculated somehow, as if apologists for the Left were carefully
focusing on Hitler and then changing the subject before the others >>>>> could even be discussed.
The issue here isn't the actual history, but the popular perception. >>>> There's a reason for Godwin's Law.
The popular perception is *wrong*. But of course you'd never do anything >>> to change that since it is in your favour. The average person thinks
Hitler is the worst human being ever and no one could be worse so it
seems logical to deduce that leftist dictators were somehow less bad.
That kind of reasoning clearly works in favour of the Left.
"Popular perception", more than bias (or me) guides content editors.
When they should be guided by factual truth. You're making my case for me.
On Oct 5, 2026 at 3:08:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
I asked Google:Just to nip in the bud this "I asked Google" trend you seem to have instituted
for your every response these days:
Don't bother. I don't trust Google. I've caught Google (and several other AIs)
in basic factual errors and outright lies in the past, so quoting to me what some bot vomited forth doesn't win you any points. (Months back I asked the Google AI how many Rs there are in the word "strawberry" and it told me there are two Rs and was immune to argument to the contrary.)
When you can ask for a picture of the Founding Fathers and it gives you a picture consisting wholly of black people and for good measure it includes some women in the graoup portrait also, the AI's factual credibility is destroyed. That tells me every answer it gives passes through a DEI approval process first and if it fails, the facts are "adjusted" accordingly.
On 10/5/2026 6:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 5, 2026 at 2:50:28 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/5/2026 3:32 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-05 11:16 a.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 10:10 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-04 5:10 p.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 2:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 4, 2026 at 8:45:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/4/2026 5:02 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 3, 2026 at 6:56:15 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 6:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Whatever bias that may be, the only relevant question is are >>>>>>>>>> their numbers
On Oct 3, 2026 at 3:05:31 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 4:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:"A Media Research Center review of CNN, MSNBC, and PBS >>>>>>>>>>>> newscasts from 21
On Oct 3, 2026 at 12:40:42 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 10/3/2026 1:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 3, 2026 at 10:09:26 AM PDT, "Rhino" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>The question isn't whether they're wrong, the question
wrote:
Leo Kearse shares the news of how far left mediaNotice how the BBC has no trouble throwing around
outlets like the BBC
are spinning the news of the hijacking and working
the "far
right" into
the story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LpOoI4IsXU [5
minutes]
There is simply no limit on how the leftist media
will try to
cover for
their friends in the Red-Green Alliance and attack
Israel.
the label
"far Right"
but
they never refer to the UK government (or anyone
else, for that
matter) as
"far Left" no matter how far to the left they are.
Same here in America. We're constantly told by the
legacy corporate
media
that
various conservative pundits and politicians are
"far Right", but they
never
label anyone "far left", even the new crop of
communists like
Mamdani and
Bass, and Raman who are being elected in deep blue
cities. What does
someone
actually have to do to get CNN to call them "far
Left"?
According to Google's AI, CNN calls these Americans
'far right':
• Nick Fuentes: Described by CNN as a far-right
streamer and
internet
personality.
• Ivan Raiklin: Identified in CNN reporting as a
far- right activist
and figure promoting political "retribution" lists and
conspiracy
theories regarding the January 6 Capitol attack. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> • Alex Jones: Referred to by CNN as a far-right
radio host and
conspiracy theorist.
Are they wrong? (I know only Jones, and only from
Sandy Hook.)
is why don't they
consistently (or ever) apply converse "far Left" labels
to those who
qualify?
Google's AI again. CNN calls these 'far-left': >>>>>>>>>>>>>
• Hasan Piker: A prominent progressive online
streamer and political
commentator whom CNN and other political analysts >>>>>>>>>>>>> frequently identify as
a leading voice and amplifier for the far-left and >>>>>>>>>>>>> democratic socialist
wing of the party.
• Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and
affiliated local
political candidates (such as New York figures like Zohran
Mamdani and
Claire Valdez), who run on platforms advocating for social
democracy,
universal healthcare, and heavy taxation of corporate wealth.
• David Hogg and his political action organization
Leaders We
Deserve, which CNN has noted targets moderate or >>>>>>>>>>>>> establishment
Democratic incumbents in primary challenges to promote a
younger, more
left-leaning generation of leadership.
January to 21 June 2025 (the period covering Mamdani's >>>>>>>>>>>> primary rise) found
those networks used “far-right” or similar labels 1,222
times and
“far-left”
86 times. Across the three, Democrats were called “far-
left” only once."
I was able to Google this:
"The Media Research Center (MRC) is transparent about
its bias. Its
homepage states (retrieved Dec. 8, 2022), "The mission of The >>>>>>>>>>> Media
Research Center is to document and combat the falsehoods and >>>>>>>>>>> censorship
of the news media, entertainment media and Big Tech in order >>>>>>>>>>> to defend
and preserve America's founding principles and Judeo-Christian
values."
wrong?
Well, where there's demonstrable (and, here, acknowledged) bias, you
have to reserve certainty. Meanwhile, though, Google does say: >>>>>>>>>
"Yes, CNN mentions "far-right" significantly more often than
"far-left.""
Okay, and since it's the far-Left that's significantly more >>>>>>>> dangerous to life
and limb-- e.g., the far-Right has nothing on its resume comparable >>>>>>>> to the
2020 celebration of Saint Floyd of Fentanyl (may peace be upon >>>>>>>> him)-- this
sort of behavior by the media would make them not just wrong but a >>>>>>>> threat to
the fabric of society.
The question (well, *a* question) is whether lopsided mentions might >>>>>>> just owe to reader-attention. While it's true that both right and >>>>>>> left have scary histories, Hitler is still the bogeyman de
résistance...
Hitler was indeed vile but Stalin and Mao killed far more of their >>>>>> own people and Pol Pot killed a larger percentage of his own people >>>>>> than either Hitler, Stalin or Mao. But the lion's share of
discussions of the worst monsters typically puts places Hitler as the >>>>>> worst of the worst. That ignorance of reality has always felt
calculated somehow, as if apologists for the Left were carefully >>>>>> focusing on Hitler and then changing the subject before the others >>>>>> could even be discussed.
The issue here isn't the actual history, but the popular perception. >>>>> There's a reason for Godwin's Law.
The popular perception is *wrong*. But of course you'd never do anything
to change that since it is in your favour. The average person thinks >>>> Hitler is the worst human being ever and no one could be worse so it >>>> seems logical to deduce that leftist dictators were somehow less bad. >>>> That kind of reasoning clearly works in favour of the Left.
"Popular perception", more than bias (or me) guides content editors.
When they should be guided by factual truth. You're making my case for me.
That's a moral "should". But one of the costs of capitalism is that the profit motive eventually worms its way into everything.
On Oct 6, 2026 at 8:16:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/5/2026 6:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 5, 2026 at 2:50:28 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 10/5/2026 3:32 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-05 11:16 a.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 10:10 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-10-04 5:10 p.m., moviePig wrote:
On 10/4/2026 2:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 4, 2026 at 8:45:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 10/4/2026 5:02 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Oct 3, 2026 at 6:56:15 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 6:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Whatever bias that may be, the only relevant question is are >>>>>>>>>>> their numbers
On Oct 3, 2026 at 3:05:31 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 10/3/2026 4:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:"A Media Research Center review of CNN, MSNBC, and PBS >>>>>>>>>>>>> newscasts from 21
On Oct 3, 2026 at 12:40:42 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 10/3/2026 1:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 3, 2026 at 10:09:26 AM PDT, "Rhino" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>The question isn't whether they're wrong, the question
wrote:
Leo Kearse shares the news of how far left mediaNotice how the BBC has no trouble throwing around
outlets like the BBC
are spinning the news of the hijacking and working
the "far
right" into
the story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LpOoI4IsXU [5
minutes]
There is simply no limit on how the leftist media
will try to
cover for
their friends in the Red-Green Alliance and attack
Israel.
the label
"far Right"
but
they never refer to the UK government (or anyone
else, for that
matter) as
"far Left" no matter how far to the left they are.
Same here in America. We're constantly told by the
legacy corporate
media
that
various conservative pundits and politicians are
"far Right", but they
never
label anyone "far left", even the new crop of
communists like
Mamdani and
Bass, and Raman who are being elected in deep blue
cities. What does
someone
actually have to do to get CNN to call them "far
Left"?
According to Google's AI, CNN calls these Americans
'far right':
• Nick Fuentes: Described by CNN as a far-right
streamer and
internet
personality.
• Ivan Raiklin: Identified in CNN reporting as a
far- right activist
and figure promoting political "retribution" lists and
conspiracy
theories regarding the January 6 Capitol attack.
• Alex Jones: Referred to by CNN as a far-right
radio host and
conspiracy theorist.
Are they wrong? (I know only Jones, and only from
Sandy Hook.)
is why don't they
consistently (or ever) apply converse "far Left" labels
to those who
qualify?
Google's AI again. CNN calls these 'far-left': >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
• Hasan Piker: A prominent progressive online
streamer and political
commentator whom CNN and other political analysts >>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequently identify as
a leading voice and amplifier for the far-left and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> democratic socialist
wing of the party.
• Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and
affiliated local
political candidates (such as New York figures like Zohran
Mamdani and
Claire Valdez), who run on platforms advocating for social
democracy,
universal healthcare, and heavy taxation of corporate wealth.
• David Hogg and his political action organization
Leaders We
Deserve, which CNN has noted targets moderate or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> establishment
Democratic incumbents in primary challenges to promote a
younger, more
left-leaning generation of leadership.
January to 21 June 2025 (the period covering Mamdani's >>>>>>>>>>>>> primary rise) found
those networks used “far-right” or similar labels 1,222
times and
“far-left”
86 times. Across the three, Democrats were called “far-
left” only once."
I was able to Google this:
"The Media Research Center (MRC) is transparent about
its bias. Its
homepage states (retrieved Dec. 8, 2022), "The mission of The
Media
Research Center is to document and combat the falsehoods and
censorship
of the news media, entertainment media and Big Tech in order
to defend
and preserve America's founding principles and Judeo-Christian
values."
wrong?
Well, where there's demonstrable (and, here, acknowledged) bias, you
have to reserve certainty. Meanwhile, though, Google does say: >>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, CNN mentions "far-right" significantly more often than
"far-left.""
Okay, and since it's the far-Left that's significantly more >>>>>>>>> dangerous to life
and limb-- e.g., the far-Right has nothing on its resume comparable
to the
2020 celebration of Saint Floyd of Fentanyl (may peace be upon >>>>>>>>> him)-- this
sort of behavior by the media would make them not just wrong but a
threat to
the fabric of society.
The question (well, *a* question) is whether lopsided mentions might
just owe to reader-attention. While it's true that both right and
left have scary histories, Hitler is still the bogeyman de >>>>>>>> résistance...
Hitler was indeed vile but Stalin and Mao killed far more of their >>>>>>> own people and Pol Pot killed a larger percentage of his own people >>>>>>> than either Hitler, Stalin or Mao. But the lion's share of
discussions of the worst monsters typically puts places Hitler as the
worst of the worst. That ignorance of reality has always felt >>>>>>> calculated somehow, as if apologists for the Left were carefully >>>>>>> focusing on Hitler and then changing the subject before the others >>>>>>> could even be discussed.
The issue here isn't the actual history, but the popular perception. >>>>>> There's a reason for Godwin's Law.
The popular perception is *wrong*. But of course you'd never do anything
to change that since it is in your favour. The average person thinks >>>>> Hitler is the worst human being ever and no one could be worse so it >>>>> seems logical to deduce that leftist dictators were somehow less bad. >>>>> That kind of reasoning clearly works in favour of the Left.
"Popular perception", more than bias (or me) guides content editors.
When they should be guided by factual truth. You're making my case for me.
That's a moral "should". But one of the costs of capitalism is that the
profit motive eventually worms its way into everything.
And with collectivism, the media lies are directly mandated from the top down by a state that runs the media.
| Sysop: | Scott Duensing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Freeburg, IL, USA, Earth |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 497974:25:54 |
| Calls: | 8 |
| Messages: | 25,042 |