Right .FecalFace said:I said that your "example is deliberately misleading", false equivalency.casa_mugrienta said:Yes it is what they're doing. Biased polling i.e. oversampling throughout the election is just one example.FecalFace said:Yes that would be fake.casa_mugrienta said:I interview 100 male students at Liberty University regarding whether or not they think homosex is wrong.FecalFace said:"When bias becomes fake"
A fake bias is not an actual bias, so what's the problem?
90/100 of them say they believe homosex is wrong.
I then write an article under the headline "90% of US male college students believe homosex is wrong."
That's how bias becomes fake news.
I'm not going to explain this to you any more.
But that's not what CNN is doing.
They always preface the poll results by saying it's a CNN POLL.
Your example is deliberately misleading.
Funny to accuse me of being "deliberately misleading" on this topic - that's OK (just bias!) in your book.
Reading comprehension Caca.
Revealing the results of the poll but omitting the source (Liberty University in your false example) would be deliberately misleading.
That's not what CNN is doing.
Like that CNN poll where Hillary had a landslide vistory over Trump...that sampled 25% Repubelicans, 45% Democraps, and 30% Independents?
Because the average joe usually reads the fine print about the polling methodology.
"Forget the headline, forget the article - it's up to you to read the fine print!"
Creating news that conforms to your bias by omitting key details, manipulating polls, etc. is when bias becomes fake news. And CNN is guilty.
It's no different than the example I showed involving Liberty University.
CNN and Breitbart are two peas in a pod. "Fake news" lol.