Joe Jagunich: You say you're a news junkie? Every point you've made is from the far-right news sources. Even Fox News reports lately are more critical of him, and have done polls that show his support among voters to be around 40%.....not good news for Trump. Your newsgathering efforts need to be more inclusive.
Yes, I am a news junkie. No, I do not watch Fox News. They have drifted from what they did that attracted me to them in the first place. If I tune in, it would only be for specific hosts. Likewise, I have not watched either cable or network news.
Heck, I don't even watch TV.
As with others who have made assumptions about me, you are wrong about where I get my news and with regards to where I need to get my news.
My "reading of the news" involves Internet searches surrounding specific topics and issues. The Paris Climate Accord? I didn't just go by the reports that I came across. I downloaded the text of the treaty and read it for myself. Collusion? I downloaded the Mueller Report and went through it. I didn't just go by what the media said. Climate change? I go straight to the websites that track raw data. I also went straight to the studies.
In every instance where I come across a study or the text of a treaty, it didn't support the media narrative that talked about that study or treaty.
The information that I argued above is based on this extensive research. I look for information that could be substantiated. I don't just trust what people say at face value. I go straight for "Tier 1" information sources.
The conclusions that I come to are based on that research. If it happens that my points are consistent with what you identify as "far-right news", then that is just a situation where two different people made the same or similar conclusions based on a review of the same information.
Also, given the track record of the polling of the 2016 presidential race, do you honest to God think that I will trust polling data that you throw around? Remember, Donald Trump was supposed to lose in 2016. This was based on polling and on pundit analysis. He was polling poorly, even into election night. That night, he started with a high probability of losing the election.
Well, we know how that turned out, don't we?
Don't make an assumption about what I'm doing with regards to information gathering, and what I'm not doing. I've yet to have someone make a negative assumption about me and be correct. They've always been wrong.
Contrary to your erroneous assumption, my news gathering is extensive and includes far more sources than what you assume I'm using. If by being "inclusive", you want me to include the propagandist sources of information that you follow, I would say, "No thanks."
Let's take CNN and MSNBC for example. They hammered the drum hard about Russian Collusion. I downloaded the Mueller Report and went through it. Nowhere, in that report, did it say that President Trump knowingly colluded with the Russians. Nowhere in that report did it say that anybody involved with the Trump campaign knowingly colluded with the Russians.
Yet, far left/radical left/leftwing news sources like CNN and MSNBC pushed that narrative as if "there was" collusion. The report disagreed with their hyped narrative, and it disagreed with the "obstruction" nonsense that these media sources were peddling.
The 97% "consensus" on climate change? I downloaded that study and went through it. It turned out that this "97%" is based on 32% of the papers downloaded out of over 11,000 papers downloaded. They focused on the abstracts. I'm sorry, but "97%" of "32%" does not constitute a "consensus" among the scientific community.
But wait! There's more! They only read the abstracts for these papers. The meat and potatoes are actually in the paper, after the abstract, not in the abstract. This was a sham study that disregarded scientific research principles. Yet, the leftist propaganda media harped this "consensus" as if they were quoting the Bible.
These are the information sources that you want me to "be inclusive of". I'm sorry, but I will reject propaganda. My primary MOS in the Army is Psychological Operations (PSYOP). One of PSYOP's duties, while combat deployed, is to counter enemy propaganda. A look at leftwing news like CNN, MSNBC, New York Times et al. shows an example of textbook propaganda.
No comments:
Post a Comment