Michael was referring to the original definition of "fake news" - falsehoods that get widely circulated. — Relativist

That is exactly what I was referring to also.

Trump uses the term to refer to unfavorable coverage. Avoid conflating the two, and you could then have productive conversations. If CNN is spreading actual falsehoods, that's something I want to know about. I — Relativist

You can find that very esily all the time, if you compare CNN coverage with the original footage of what they cover. Of course, if you stay inside the CNN/BBC/Guardian/NYT echo chamber, you always hear the same opinion narrative.

You can find that very esily all the time, if you compare CNN coverage with the original footage of what they cover. Of course, if you stay inside the CNN/BBC/Guardian/NYT echo chamber, you always hear the same opinion narrative. — Nobeernolife

Give me some notable examples of CNN spreading falsehoods. I want to understand what you'rw talking about.

All politicians spout political hyperbole. If you count that as "lying", they all lie all the time. — Nobeernolife

Oh, so if they just report the weather today, that's also "hyperbole"?

Now lies I that I am concerned about are lies that have catastrophic results, such as the lie that the Bengazi jihadis were a popular, democratic uprising against Gaddafi. For examople. — Nobeernolife

Or lying about having a dangerous epidemic under control while it is in fact spreading uninhibited across the country?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQllunHssEk
You might want to check before rushing to the keyboard — Nobeernolife

Nowhere in that video does it say that only CNN is allowed to read WikiLeaks. Is what the person is saying a lie? How about you go ahead and prove it? Or are you the liar here?

The original complete clip has been removed by Youtube and Twitter (what a surprise), but you can still find parts of it. Watch it tell us how truthful CNN is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g62_UMiv6wY — Nobeernolife

That video actually proves the protest wasn't staged. Only a specific view on the protest was created. We could call it an "alternate protest". This really just is media showmanship. Everyone does it all the time. I just care about actual, damaging lies. Like lying about climate change. If that's the best you can offer, I think I was right all along.

He said "good people on both sides" about the pro/anti statue protesters, and NOT about the neonazis. Very clearly. Which you would know if you actually read the transcript, instead of listening to the fake media lies. The fake media narrative is a total lie, and one of the most shameful ones. — Nobeernolife

Sorry, dude, but that's just like, your opinion. Opinions aren't facts, and having one isn't lying. You got nothing here.

No, it did NOT. Trump NEVER recommended drinking fish tank cleaner, like these two idiots did.
The misrepresentation by the Guardian et al is patently fake news. — Nobeernolife

Show me the report that said that Trump recommended drinking fish tank cleaner. Or the report saying the guy did exactly what Trump recommended. It's all just a narrative in your head.

Give me some notable examples of CNN spreading falsehoods. I want to understand what you'rw talking about. — Relativist

A good example is “pussygate”. I felt like the incident was pretty thoroughly misreported on CNN and most other media. First, they left out what proceeded his actual pussy grabbing comment which was “...when youre a celebrity, they LET you do whatever you want” or something close to that. That part is always left out and clipped so it can be misrepresented as sexual predation. Within a week it went from suggesting it meant he thought it was fun to sexually assault women to calling him an admitted rapist.
It seemed pretty dishonest to me, and was spreading a falsehood.
Another common thing I see is the conflation of jokes or hyperbole as factual claims. They do it all the time, going with the worst possible interpretation of something Trump said. I mean, I get it, Trump will hide behind hyperbole or jokes or actually lie but thats exactly why its so important not to tell lies or misrepresent what he said. Once you do that, people can say the media is misrepresenting or lying and be totally correct. Then Trump can call it fake news, and be 100% right. This provides cover for the actual problematic things he says and does.
I mean, you can pretty much say anything about Trump and no one questions it. Calling him a Nazi, a racist, a narcissistic sociopath...and no one questions it. If just one of those terms is inaccurate or has no evidential basis then I would call it a falsehood.
Im not saying its only with Trump, news is such a click baiting wasteland its full of this kinda thing and an place like Fox will spread falsehoods in the opposite direction but to say that Trump isnt misrepresented or lied about by the media seems clearly untrue to me.

A good example is “pussygate”. I felt like the incident was pretty thoroughly misreported on CNN and most other media. First, they left out what proceeded his actual pussy grabbing comment which was “...when youre a celebrity, they LET you do whatever you want” or something close to that. That part is always left out and clipped so it can be misrepresented as sexual predation. Within a week it went from suggesting it meant he thought it was fun to sexually assault women to calling him an admitted rapist.
It seemed pretty dishonest to me, and was spreading a falsehood. — DingoJones

I heard the entire audio on CNN, and it included everything you said. No one has ever suggested that this isolated clip shows he's a sexual predator, but it does add context to the looooong list of sexual misconduct : he's cheated on every wife he's ever had numerous times (including Melania shortly after giving birth); there are numerous allegations of unwelcome sexual advances; he felt entitled to visit the Miss Universe contestants while they were dressing....the list goes on. His behavior toward women is indefensible. If you don't accept that, then you're burying your head in the sand.

Another common thing I see is the conflation of jokes or hyperbole as factual claims. They do it all the time, going with the worst possible interpretation of something Trump said. I mean, I get it, Trump will hide behind hyperbole or jokes or actually lie but thats exactly why its so important not to tell lies or misrepresent what he said. Once you do that, people can say the media is misrepresenting or lying and be totally correct. Then Trump can call it fake news, and be 100% right. This provides cover for the actual problematic things he says and does. — DingoJones

Trump utters an enormous number of falsehoods.
Some are downright lies (intentional untruths), some are repeating nonsense he's heard from idiots like Alex Jones, some is just pure stupidity, and yes- some is hyperbole, and much of that is inappropriate (e.g. telling police officers it's ok to rough up the people they arrest). Is it CNN's job to analyze each false utterance and discern which category they belong to? Discerning fact from fiction seems sufficient, and Trump could avoid the negative interpretations if he'd strive to make factual statements.

Nevertheless, I see the difference between opinion and facts. My steady diet of CNN has not impaired that. Contrast that with die-hard Trump supporters who are in denial of any negative reporting about Trump. I can respect a Trump supporter who likes his policies, if they are realistic about what sort if man he is. I have zero respect for someone who make excuses for everything he does.

He said "good people on both sides" about the pro/anti statue protesters, and NOT about the neonazis. Very clearly. Which you would know if you actually read the transcript, instead of listening to the fake media lies. The fake media narrative is a total lie, and one of the most shameful ones. — Nobeernolife

So there was a group of protesters supporting the removal and a group against, and the neo-nazis just happened to be in the neighborhood attending a home decor tiki torch convention or something?

I heard the entire audio on CNN, and it included everything you said. No one has ever suggested that this isolated clip shows he's a sexual predator, but it does add context to the looooong list of sexual misconduct : he's cheated on every wife he's ever had numerous times (including Melania shortly after giving birth); there are numerous allegations of unwelcome sexual advances; he felt entitled to visit the Miss Universe contestants while they were dressing....the list goes on. His behavior toward women is indefensible. If you don't accept that, then you're burying your head in the sand. — Relativist

You asked for an example of him being misrepresented in the news, which I provided. Whether it fits an overall narrative about Trump is another matter. Just because someone does something wrong doesn't mean that you can freely make up more instances of that something and claim they are true.

Trump utters an enormous number of falsehoods.
Some are downright lies (intentional untruths), some are repeating nonsense he's heard from idiots like Alex Jones, some is just pure stupidity, and yes- some is hyperbole, and much of that is inappropriate (e.g. telling police officers it's ok to rough up the people they arrest).Is it CNN's job to analyze each false utterance and discern which category they belong to? Discerning fact from fiction seems sufficient, and Trump could avoid the negative interpretations if he'd strive to make factual statements. — Relativist

Lol, yes! That is their job, not going “we hate this guy, lets just go with close enough”. Its actually very important to get it as accurate as possible, to recognise distinctions between lies, errors, ignorance etc.
Those are important distinctions and again, not being accurate or open about those distinctions is costly for any kind of anti-trump agenda. It plays into his hands, it lets him accurately claim “fake news”, which obscures the truth and any lies Trump actually does tell. It allows Trump To muddy the waters.

Nevertheless, I see the difference between opinion and facts. My steady diet of CNN has not impaired that. Contrast that with die-hard Trump supporters who are in denial of any negative reporting about Trump. I can respect a Trump supporter who likes his policies, if they are realistic about what sort if man he is. I have zero respect for someone who make excuses for everything he does. — Relativist

Well I didnt say you couldnt tell the difference between opinion and facts, nor suggested CNN impairs your judgement. It might, I dont really know.
I said they lie about Trump, and mischaracterise Trump. To use your term, they spread falsehoods. Thats what I interjected to discuss.
Your stance on Trump supporters is noted, but I am not a Trump supporter. I dont even live in the US.

You asked for an example of him being misrepresented in the news, which I provided. — DingoJones

You claimed it was misrepresentative to only play a portion of the pussy-grabbing audio. I pointed out that I had heard the entire audio on CNN, so you are either misrepresting it yourself, or you are referring to some occasion in which only a portion was played. Notice that you object to playing only a portion of the audio out of context, while you wish to set aside the general context I brought up. Omitting that portion of the audio, on occasion, does not result in someone getting a false impression of his character. Shouldn't that be what's important?

Lol, yes! That is their job, not going “we hate this guy, lets just go with close enough”. Its actually very important to get it as accurate as possible, to recognise distinctions between lies, errors, ignorance etc.

Those are important distinctions and again, not being accurate or open about those distinctions is costly for any kind of anti-trump agenda. It plays into his hands, it lets him accurately claim “fake news”, which obscures the truth and any lies Trump actually does tell. It allows Trump To muddy the waters. — DingoJones

Distinguishing truths from untruths is generally objective. Trying decipher what kind of untruth it was is subjective. Personally, I think it's a mistake to label all untruths "lies", but that's what's done on all sides. Obama was charged with making the "lie of the year" when he said we could keep our current health insurance. It was not a statement he made to intentionally mislead; it was an inaccurate prediction and therefore in hindsight, it was an untruth. In politics, all untruths get labeled "lies" - that's just the way it is. That's not different with Trump; the only thing that's different with him is the sheer quantity. And because the quantity is so enormous, Trump supporters delude themselves by cherry picking some statements that were not intentional lies, and then complain Trump is picked on.

Within a week it went from suggesting it meant he thought it was fun to sexually assault women to calling him an admitted rapist. — DingoJones

Who called him an "admitted rapist"? Some opinion piece somewhere? Have a source for that?

Lol, yes! That is their job, not going “we hate this guy, lets just go with close enough”. Its actually very important to get it as accurate as possible, to recognise distinctions between lies, errors, ignorance etc.
Those are important distinctions and again, not being accurate or open about those distinctions is costly for any kind of anti-trump agenda. It plays into his hands, it lets him accurately claim “fake news”, which obscures the truth and any lies Trump actually does tell. It allows Trump To muddy the waters. — DingoJones

Isn't it entirely possible it's mostly lies, and claiming it's anything else is "muddying the waters"? How could anyone possibly know with certainty which statements are intentional and which are accidental lies?

I said they lie about Trump, and mischaracterise Trump. To use your term, they spread falsehoods. Thats what I interjected to discuss. — DingoJones

Wait. You just said how very important it is to distinguish between lies, repeating nonsense, hyperbole etc. And here you are, claiming all they do is lie. Why don't you apply your own standard to them and try to analyse each statement in detail?

You claimed it was misrepresentative to only play a portion of the pussy-grabbing audio. I pointed out that I had heard the entire audio on CNN, so you are either misrepresting it yourself, or you are referring to some occasion in which only a portion was played. Notice that you object to playing only a portion of the audio out of context, while you wish to set aside the general context I brought up. Omitting that portion of the audio, on occasion, does not result in someone getting a false impression of his character. Shouldn't that be what's important? — Relativist

If at any time they didn't play that important part of the recording for context it was a falsehood. It gives the condemnable words context, and without them it sounds worse. Leaving it out so it sounds worse is spreading a falsehood.
Anyway, I watch CNN too. I dont hate CNN. I realise now that I should have been more clear about how general I was being, its not CNN constantly spreading misinformation, its the media in general. (Of which CNN is part of and guilty on occasion.
As far as general judgement of his character, that a lie reflects someones true character doesnt mean its not a lie. If a guy is a thief, its still not ok to lie about him stealing something. If someones a dirtbag, you still shouldn't lie to make them look like more of a dirtbag.

Who called him an "admitted rapist"? Some opinion piece somewhere? Have a source for that? — Echarmion

Not offhand no, it was a story about how that audio was an admission of guilt for sexual assault and I saw it referenced elsewhere (re-reported). Sorry, cant recall exactly.

Isn't it entirely possible it's mostly lies, and claiming it's anything else is "muddying the waters"? How could anyone possibly know with certainty which statements are intentional and which are accidental lies? — Echarmion

I dont know, and I didnt say anything about certainty did I? Im not someone who things many things can be certain.

Wait. You just said how very important it is to distinguish between lies, repeating nonsense, hyperbole etc. And here you are, claiming all they do is lie. Why don't you apply your own standard to them and try to analyse each statement in detail? — Echarmion

I didnt say all they do is lie. Is that what you read in the part you quoted? I said “they lie”. If I say “they sleep” does that mean thats all they do? Lol
I love how you started with”Wait”. Lol. Was that a big gotchya moment?
And I do apply the same standard to them. I try to apply the same standards to everyone, where context permits of course.

I didnt say all they do is lie. Is that what you read in the part you quoted? I said “they lie”. If I say “they sleep” does that mean thats all they do? Lol — DingoJones

Regardless, you failed to specify. You went straight from "it's not 100% accurate" to "it's a lie". Yet you complained that all of Trumps inaccurate statements are treated as lies. That seems like a double standard to me.

Anyway, I watch CNN too. I dont hate CNN. I realise now that I should have been more clear about how general I was being, its not CNN constantly spreading misinformation, its the media in general. — DingoJones

It seems a very odd hill to choose to die on. Most media outlets have some political bias. Almost all of them have a significant economic bias. There are plenty stories that go unheard or are badly mangled by the media. When it comes to inaccuracies in major news outlets, Trump is the last thing I'd worry about. The misrepresentations about Trump are just incredibly minor compared to some of the other shit that goes on.

Regardless, you failed to specify. You went straight from "it's not 100% accurate" to "it's a lie". Yet you complained that all of Trumps inaccurate statements are treated as lies. That seems like a double standard to me. — Echarmion

It only seems like a double standard because of your low reading comprehension. Ive already explained this failure on your part but evidently you didnt understand that either.

It seems a very odd hill to choose to die on. Most media outlets have some political bias. Almost all of them have a significant economic bias. There are plenty stories that go unheard or are badly mangled by the media. When it comes to inaccuracies in major news outlets, Trump is the last thing I'd worry about. The misrepresentations about Trump are just incredibly minor compared to some of the other shit that goes on. — Echarmion

Its not a hill im dying on, not all opinions, comments or disagreements are hills to die upon. Get a grip.
Anyway, last word is yours, we are done here.

I think the exact terminology was that trump was “bragging about sexual assault”. This isn’t true, but it no less was the dogma at the time and likely still is.

Right, and it was repeated and exaggerated. Thats an example of spreading falsehoods in my books.

Right, and it was repeated and exaggerated. Thats an example of spreading falsehoods in my books. — DingoJones

Right. So when there is smoke there is not necessarily fire. It could be something else. Or perhaps there is no smoke that you can see. Or maybe there is not enough smoke . Any consideration of there being a fire should be rejected as rash speculation because other possibilities exist.

Non-sequitor, i was providing an example of news spreading falsehoods about Trump not a reference to Trumps character. Im not rejecting anything as rash speculation, nor suggesting anyone else do so. This was actually addressed above anyway, if you're following along.

Okay. Wrong spot in the conversation.

If at any time they didn't play that important part of the recording for context it was a falsehood. It gives the condemnable words context, and without them it sounds worse. Leaving it out so it sounds worse is spreading a falsehood. — DingoJones

Right...the words taken out of context sound worse than warranted by in the context of his total conversation. And that conversation just sounds like an anomaly if you ignore the context of his general behavior toward women.

No one got a false impression about Trump's character. Trumpists like you nitpick to avoid confronting that reality. Trump is a rude, arrogant, mysogynist asshole. Embrace the policies you like, but stop fooling yourself about his character.

See it really seems like a blind spot for you, and Im not trying to be a prick. Im a Trumpist?! I imagine we mostly agree on what kind of character the man shows, had you bothered to ask. How could you know im fooling myself about his character when Ive expressed so very little about it? Sorry, but I think you are assuming alot about me just because I noticed that media, including CNN, have spread falsehoods about Trump.
Honestly, Im not trying to be antagonistic but thats fairly well out of line to call me a Trumpist. You have no real basis for that claim, except that we apparently disagree the news has spread falsehoods about Trump. So ask yourself why you made these baseless assumptions, and how it might be a problem when discussing this topic.
Anyway, I think my original point still stands.

I’m curious what your views are here on ‘lockdowns’ and NY without any emotional baggage attached (if possible?)

Just curious because if you take a brief look across the Atlantic ‘lockdowns’ are not exactly being touted as a terrible idea.

Remember ‘a broken clock is correct twice a day’.

You-all are pigs. But you want to be in the parlor. — tim wood

Animal Farm:
A Fairy Story.

Allegory.

I have my share of Duh! moments, most transparently when I make a move in a chess game that is an instant loser. Palm smacks forehead, "Duh!" And I keep making the loser move with respect to this thread on Trump. We know what he is. He has told us and shown us. Some people refuse this knowledge. For reasons of their own, they refuse to know. And our - my - Duh! move is to keep trying to educate them. But there is no accounting for what some people will think, or how or why some people choose to be stupid. And I stupid for trying in the face of clear evidence I will not succeed. But growth is always possible, and I think my mini-epiphany that some folks here are either hopeless or deliberate, though not realizing that the deliberate choice is itself a sign of being hopeless, will be a curative for me.

So to the nos4s@NOS4A2 and noballs@Nobeernolife - these just the flag carriers; the rest know themselves who they are - this thread is all yours. Without the dissonance of knee-JERK reactionaries like me, you shall be now able to contemplate your hero in his perfection without distraction. Enjoy your view - to each his own. In trust you know that continually ingesting poison will either kill you or make you yourself poison.

I really think there is no depth of depravity to which the man will not descend.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/trump-blames-hospitals-for-coronavirus-mask-shortages.html

And our - my - Duh! move is to keep trying to educate them. — tim wood

"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."

-Unknown, sometimes attributed to Swift

will either kill you or make you yourself poison. — tim wood

"The darkness knows neither the light nor itself; only the light knows itself and the darkness also."

George Macdonald

Inspiring words from our beloved leader:

"President Trump is a ratings hit. Since reviving the daily White House briefing Mr. Trump and his coronavirus updates have attracted an average audience of 8.5 million on cable news, roughly the viewership of the season finale of ‘The Bachelor.’ Numbers are continuing to rise..."
-- March 29, Trump's twitter

No need to obsess on infection rates and the potential for overwhelming our healthcare system. Instead let's cheer his ratings success! Way to go, Donald!

Nowhere in that video does it say that only CNN is allowed to read WikiLeaks. Is what the person is saying a lie? How about you go ahead and prove it? Or are you the liar here? — Echarmion

He says it is illegal for unwashed to read Wikileaks. But he at CNN can.

That video actually proves the protest wasn't staged. Only a specific view on the protest was created.

If you had seen the original raw footage (removed by Youtube) you would see the Hollywood production that CNN staged, complete with directions and pre-printed placards. Still the link I posted show some of it.

Sorry, dude, but that's just like, your opinion. Opinions aren't facts, and having one isn't lying. You got nothing here.

Nope, not an opinion. If you read the transcript, you clearly see that Trump was talking about good people on both sides of the monumet debate, not on both sides of the neonazi / antineonazi fights. This is a blatant lie by CNN, and one of the most despiccable ones.

Show me the report that said that Trump recommended drinking fish tank cleaner. Or the report saying the guy did exactly what Trump recommended. It's all just a narrative in your head.

An honest title would have been "2 idiots die from drinking fish tank cleaner". Instead of that, the fake media turned that into something like "people die from following Trumps Corona medicine recommendation" (not verbatim, but different variations of that). Trump had said that Hydroxychloroquinine could be a "game changer", which it is. He NEVER said people should drink fish tank desinfectant contining Chloroquininesulpate, with "NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION" printed on the package.

I said they lie about Trump, and mischaracterise Trump. To use your term, they spread falsehoods. Thats what I interjected to discuss.
Your stance on Trump supporters is noted, but I am not a Trump supporter. I dont even live in the US. — DingoJones

I do not either, by the way, but the Trump hatred is pretty much the same among the Western globalist media. On a related note, a Rasmussen poll just showed that only democratic voters believe that most reporters are simply trying to report the news in a non-biased fashion. This is so not surprising!