William Saletan at Slate claims this conflict is solely about the headline. Because Kavanaugh did not literally "say" he'd kill Roe v. Wade, Saletan agrees with TWS that the headline is false.
He goes on to say TWS offered to withdraw its false rating if Think Progress changed the headline.
I love Wonkette. I love Vox. After reading articles from both sources, I was convinced TWS was guilty of “placing right-wing ideology before accurate reporting" and appalled that Facebook was letting it happen. I hadn't realized the issue boils down to a single word; but now that I have, I must admit the word is false.
Wouldn't have taken but a second to change "Kavanaugh said he'll kill Roe v. Wade" to "Did Kavanaugh say he'd kill Roe v. Wade?"
I totally, totally, totally know how rightwing media distorts facts. That's so huge an issue it should be called out at every opportunity.
But this isn't a case of rightwing distortion. "Saying" is directly stating. "Implying" is pussyfooting around. Any fact checker would have flagged that headline as misleading.
And I think it matters. I think it's incredibly important to save outrage for real outrages. We don't want to be as knee jerk as the wingnuts, do we? Or as blinded by fear/hate and determined to prove "they're always wrong" "we're always right." It's not so bad to occasionally see the other guy has a point.
I get that there's a bigger picture. I get that TWS publishes so much trash, it's reasonable to argue they're too biased to fact check. Great point! But it deserves to be backed up by a good example, as do accusations of censorship. This isn't an example of either.
"..you cant say that you see a Elephant and someone else says it not there.."And irony looks at that, throws up its hands and goes home to drink Sterno.
Funny, but Elephants are physical beings and their presence is simple fact, you cant say that you see a Elephant and someone else says it not there...Bias on the other hand is subjective and whats fair to you might have someone else throwing a hissy fit and thats what going on on both sides with Facebook.
we know liberal sites have gotten more and more full of shit. Hambests skunky jew hut is no exception and is very on trend. remember the ratfucking you gave that queer, all rooted in bigotry and bullshit, the kind worthy of dave brock peter daou or lanny davis or the true scum of the Clinton empire or their children.
William Saletan at Slate claims this conflict is solely about the headline. Because Kavanaugh did not literally "say" he'd kill Roe v. Wade, Saletan agrees with TWS that the headline is false.
He goes on to say TWS offered to withdraw its false rating if Think Progress changed the headline.
I love Wonkette. I love Vox. After reading articles from both sources, I was convinced TWS was guilty of “placing right-wing ideology before accurate reporting" and appalled that Facebook was letting it happen. I hadn't realized the issue boils down to a single word; but now that I have, I must admit the word is false.
Wouldn't have taken but a second to change "Kavanaugh said he'll kill Roe v. Wade" to "Did Kavanaugh say he'd kill Roe v. Wade?"
I totally, totally, totally know how rightwing media distorts facts. That's so huge an issue it should be called out at every opportunity.
But this isn't a case of rightwing distortion. "Saying" is directly stating. "Implying" is pussyfooting around. Any fact checker would have flagged that headline as misleading.
And I think it matters. I think it's incredibly important to save outrage for real outrages. We don't want to be as knee jerk as the wingnuts, do we? Or as blinded by fear/hate and determined to prove "they're always wrong" "we're always right." It's not so bad to occasionally see the other guy has a point.
I get that there's a bigger picture. I get that TWS publishes so much trash, it's reasonable to argue they're too biased to fact check. Great point! But it deserves to be backed up by a good example, as do accusations of censorship. This isn't an example of either.
https://slate.com/news-and-...
People have this crazy notion that rich people can't be bought. Like White Supremacy, or Male Supremacy, it's entirely counter-factual!
I'm afraid any American still on Facebook can pretty much expect more of the same. FB is NOT America's friend.
People are always bitching and moaning about Dems being bad at messaging, but this is the kind of shit we're up against!
Pink, gray, all I see is elephants. Like Tarzan, I'm colorblind.
"..you cant say that you see a Elephant and someone else says it not there.."And irony looks at that, throws up its hands and goes home to drink Sterno.
Funny, but Elephants are physical beings and their presence is simple fact, you cant say that you see a Elephant and someone else says it not there...Bias on the other hand is subjective and whats fair to you might have someone else throwing a hissy fit and thats what going on on both sides with Facebook.
it happened to beer in this country . . . but we're making a comeback!
so twatter would be the sucking chest wound on the body politic?
so, color matters?
that's racist!
we know liberal sites have gotten more and more full of shit. Hambests skunky jew hut is no exception and is very on trend. remember the ratfucking you gave that queer, all rooted in bigotry and bullshit, the kind worthy of dave brock peter daou or lanny davis or the true scum of the Clinton empire or their children.
Nobody could have predicted.. https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Thomas is pretty punk. It's Edward that loves everybody.
I couldn't believe #11!
Republicans get to use the Special Rules. He's allowed to.
Just FYI, I will be stealing this line at the first available opportunity. And the second, third, etc.