Joe vs Gupta

GromsDad

Duke status
Jan 21, 2014
43,683
8,633
113
West of the Atlantic. East of the ICW.
This thread is about the CNN’s clown car legitimacy as a news source.

RG got it right.

Start another thread about the effectivity of monkey semen for Covid mitigation now, ask hal how.
The left would have praised monkey semen and traveled across the globe to get it and would have lobbied for monkey semen to be administered in the US without FDA approval during the AIDS epidemic if they thought there were even the slightest chance it might be an effective AIDS treatment.

Now the same people are outraged that anyone experiments with current drugs on the market in the hopes that they find an effective treatment for Covid.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: mundus

Phi1

Phil Edwards status
May 21, 2002
5,936
2,141
113
Hell Cajon, Ca
CNN lied because they said Joe took horse dewormer when he actually took Ivermectin which is the active ingredient in horse dewormer and Heartguard for cats and dogs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: afoaf

Sharkbiscuit

Duke status
Aug 6, 2003
19,650
11,199
113
Jacksonville Beach
Now do elk semen.

It won’t be long before the same warnings will be on bottled water.

But that isn’t the subject of the thread. CNN, as prax pointed out, has become far left pablum just as Fox is for the far right.
IMHO Fox News isn't that far right and CNN isn't that far left. OAN and Alex Jones are far right. Fox is basic bitch right.

The hot warnings have been on hot coffee at McDonald's for a while.

If Ivermectin was conclusively worth half a sh!t the below wouldn't be on Merck's website:

If a mischaracterization of similar magnitude showed up on Fox News in anything other than Shep Smith's show before he got canned, it would be the most accurate piece of information they ever relayed to their viewers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hammies and Phi1

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
40,986
13,922
113
The left would have praised monkey semen and traveled across the globe to get it and would have lobbied for monkey semen to be administered in the US without FDA approval during the AIDS epidemic if they thought there were even the slightest chance it might be an effective AIDS treatment.

Now the same people are outraged that anyone experiments with current drugs on the market in the hopes that they find an effective treatment for Covid.
see, this is how fkn stupid you are

if there was an existing, approved, free, and widely available drug that all but squashed the mortality rate AND people were still trying monkey semen, then your stupid fkn analogy would work.

in this case it does not because at the time THERE WERE NO FKN THERAPEUTICS AVAILABLE FOR AIDS

dumb motherfkrs
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: sizzld1 and Norm'

Phi1

Phil Edwards status
May 21, 2002
5,936
2,141
113
Hell Cajon, Ca
People are mad because the government oversold the efficacy of the vaccines as some silver bullet to beat COVID. They wish the government would have pushed ivermectin, which has thus far proven less effective than the vaccines they got behind.

Yes, I totally get the outrage now. :rolleyes:
 

Sharky

Michael Peterson status
Feb 25, 2006
3,281
3,692
113
Watch chris cuomo- total fvcking drama queen pactically screeching
Or the black guy, don something, after him - low key, but all drama
Anderson cooper is clearly biased, but nowhere near as over the top in his delivery as the other 2

at least msnbc and Rachel Maddow was always that way
24 hour for profit “news” was a bad idea for our country
I really wonder want a real news network with truly unbiased, for the people, news would look like
And how their viewership would compare to the extremes we’ve got today
CNN completely lost their sh!t going after Trump. It was sad to watch them morph into an op/ed provider and virtually eschew any semblance of journalistic integrity. There has always been a bias at CNN, but in the past they at least made some effort at providing news with something that resembled journalistic integrity. I was hopeful that after Trump was defeated CNN would go back to being something closer to a news network. They didn't.

This is, IMHO, about money. CNN discovered that their audience was larger when they stuck to being an opinion provider. More people watching means larger ad rates. More money is more money. So the current generation of viewers, on the whole, really doesn't want to see news. They tune in to have their biases reinforced. It makes them feel good about themselves and they get to feel self righteous. Look around this place. The level of smug self righteous BS is off the hook with a number of these people.

In the end the American people get the "news" they deserve. CNN is simply giving America what it wants and cashing in. Sadly, if there is something going on somewhere else in the world that has nothing to do with American politics, by the time CNN mentions it, whatever it is probably has a wiki page.
 

ElOgro

Duke status
Dec 3, 2010
26,167
6,317
113
IMHO Fox News isn't that far right and CNN isn't that far left. OAN and Alex Jones are far right. Fox is basic bitch right.

The hot warnings have been on hot coffee at McDonald's for a while.

If Ivermectin was conclusively worth half a sh!t the below wouldn't be on Merck's website:

If a mischaracterization of similar magnitude showed up on Fox News in anything other than Shep Smith's show before he got canned, it would be the most accurate piece of information they ever relayed to their viewers.
I don’t watch either. I read the bbc website for news in English. I’ve heard of some of the people you mentioned here on the erBB but that’s the extent of it. I have more free time to entertain myself than almost anyone else that posts here, I don’t understand the fixation with people in your age group with this tripe.

Thanks you.
 

Phi1

Phil Edwards status
May 21, 2002
5,936
2,141
113
Hell Cajon, Ca
Here’s some food for thought:

AT&T owns WarnerMedia, which owns CNN. AT&T funds OANN.

Facebook isn’t the only one to figure out conflict drives ratings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: afoaf

ElOgro

Duke status
Dec 3, 2010
26,167
6,317
113
CNN completely lost their sh!t going after Trump. It was sad to watch them morph into an op/ed provider and virtually eschew any semblance of journalistic integrity. There has always been a bias at CNN, but in the past they at least made some effort at providing news with something that resembled journalistic integrity. I was hopeful that after Trump was defeated CNN would go back to being something closer to a news network. They didn't.

This is, IMHO, about money. CNN discovered that their audience was larger when they stuck to being an opinion provider. More people watching means larger ad rates. More money is more money. So the current generation of viewers, on the whole, really doesn't want to see news. They tune in to have their biases reinforced. It makes them feel good about themselves and they get to feel self righteous. Look around this place. The level of smug self righteous BS is off the hook with a number of these people.

In the end the American people get the "news" they deserve. CNN is simply giving America what it wants and cashing in. Sadly, if there is something going on somewhere else in the world that has nothing to do with American politics, by the time CNN mentions it, whatever it is probably has a wiki page.
That’s racist. And coumophobic.
 

Sharkbiscuit

Duke status
Aug 6, 2003
19,650
11,199
113
Jacksonville Beach
This is, IMHO, about money. CNN discovered that their audience was larger when they stuck to being an opinion provider. More people watching means larger ad rates. More money is more money.

In the end the American people get the "news" they deserve. CNN is simply giving America what it wants and cashing in. Sadly, if there is something going on somewhere else in the world that has nothing to do with American politics, by the time CNN mentions it, whatever it is probably has a wiki page.
:love:

I maintain Fareed Zakaria is best-of-breed (cable news ilk) at mentioning sh!t going on elsewhere in the world that has nothing to do with American politics.
 

kidfury

Duke status
Oct 14, 2017
18,896
6,549
113
How does one "go after Trump"? Is reporting what he said and did "going after" him? I really don't get it. Who is going to opine that he's a good person, a good leader, a good citizen, a good role model? His associates...? Who is going to opine that Bannon and Manafort and Giuliani are upstanding citizens? "Going after Trump...." Really?
 

Sharky

Michael Peterson status
Feb 25, 2006
3,281
3,692
113
How does one "go after Trump"? Is reporting what he said and did "going after" him? I really don't get it. Who is going to opine that he's a good person, a good leader, a good citizen, a good role model? His associates...? Who is going to opine that Bannon and Manafort and Giuliani are upstanding citizens? "Going after Trump...." Really?
When Trump was in office, you could pick a time, any time, and turn on CNN and count how many seconds it took before someone said "Trump." It was generally in single digits. (seconds, not minutes) Most of the time there was a banner across the bottom of the screen that had "Trump blah blah blah" on it. In those cases it was 0 seconds. It went on like that for years. As I said, they reported on almost nothing that was going on in the rest of the world. And news was happening in the rest of the world. All CNN wanted to talk about was American politics. It was all Trump. 24 hours a day.

FYI, it doesn't surprise me that you were incapable of seeing the above, in spite of it being right in your face. It's exactly what I would expect from you. IMO, journalism classes should be included in GE requirements in this country. The uneducated are completely incapable discerning the difference between op/ed material and news. You would be the classic example.