Folks, please fact check

[jebartle]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

[Two Bills]

On TOTV?

C'mon Son! :icon_wink:

[Bucco]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

That would be wonderful. Dealing with facts and truth is so much easier than the alternative.

[Bay Kid]

Fact checking would make the news interesting again. Can you imagine all the beeps as the news people spread their lies to the American people.

[JohnN]

Fact checking is so 20th century, like vinyl records. Dream on. But you're right, it'd be great.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Who fact checks the fact checkers?

[CoachKandSportsguy]

:blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: humans!:ohdear::ohdear:

fact checking will also require education verification, career verification, voter party verification, personality type verification, travel verification, and finally tax return verification, because news media is now financially competitive and therefore extremely biased, so

only court and legal documents along with yesterday's weather and yesterday stock prices are facts.

sorry, freedom to type means freedom of f@rting, if you know what i mean :duck:

:blahblahblah::blahblahblah::blahblahblah::blahbla hblah::blahblahblah:

[CWGUY]

On TOTV?

C'mon Son! :icon_wink:

:icon_wink: Facts? We don't need no stinkin facts! :popcorn:

[Topspinmo]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.


And who fact checks the fact checkers??? I find it hard to believe any news networks or anything on FB, google, Yahoo, Wikipedia, and especially Twitter. They all have their p—— agendas

[Taltarzac725]

Select the Best Information Source – Undergraduate Library – U of I Library (https://www.library.illinois.edu/ugl/howdoi/selectingsources/)

This might be useful.

[Topspinmo]

:icon_wink: Facts? We don't need no stinkin facts! :popcorn:

One’s facts is another dreams. Or if you tell the story enough And someone believes it becomes fact.

[Bonnevie]

well, what I do is fact check using many sources, both right wing and left and independent. you'd be surprised how often you will find many agreeing.

[Ooper]

Fact checkers can be just as biased and wrong as anybody else.

[Bucco]

well, what I do is fact check using many sources, both right wing and left and independent. you'd be surprised how often you will find many agreeing.

I do the same in checking valid reputable sources on both sides, ignoring opinion pieces, and find MOST ALL AGREE every time on anything substantive.

Problem is the fringe "sources" skew facts, and even videos.

Then, knowing facts and truth, I allow myself to listen to opinions, and in doing so learn the maturity level of those folks, and gradually whittle down those folks al.

Valid news media like the Times, Post, etc pretty much have editorial process in place that insures you are getting the straight scoop.

[Bucco]

Fact checkers can be just as biased and wrong as anybody else.

Don't use them....read established media with strong principaled editorial practice.

Frankly, as we have seen, most stories have tapes or videos as back up.

Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.

[Dana1963]

Don't use them....read established media with strong principaled editorial practice.

Frankly, as we have seen, most stories have tapes or videos as back up.

Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.
It's time to retire the comment/tweets ”Fake News”.

[Polar Bear]

...Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.
Boy is that ever a matter of opinion.

They may have facts buried somewhere among their opinions, but their opinions dominate their “reporting” so much that I cannot accept it as true journalism.

[Bucco]

Boy is that ever a matter of opinion.

They may have facts buried somewhere among their opinions, but their opinions dominate their “reporting” so much that I cannot accept it as true journalism.

I suppose it could be.

But, the Times is considered the single best source for news in the world. I have been reading the Times, among others for many years, and knowing the journalistic exercise the reporters are required it is a great source.

I also suppose, well I know...attitude of the reader is important. I have gone to the news "above the fold" in the Times, expecting to read certain news, only to be disappointed in what happened. That helps me, because I approach my news as a learning experience, and not a validation of what I think.

The summary, usually on page 2 is a great way to begin your day.

I seldom read the Times opinion pieces, not because I disagree, but I prefer to make my opinions based on the facts. Now, admittedly, I have left the Times and checked other sources...never a cable news show, and if needed continue to read.

Reuters is a good source....PBS is usually dependable.

Again, attitude of the reader is important. If you are looking for factual news, I, and most of the world consider the Times top notch, but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.

[Polar Bear]

I suppose it could be.

But, the Times is considered the single best source for news in the world...

...I, and most of the world consider the Times top notch, but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.
This, the rest of your praise for the Times, and your condescending observations regarding those who don’t agree with you, are nothing but your opinions.

I will say that I don’t consider the Times quite as unjournalistic as the Post, but that’s not saying much.

[Lindsyburnsy]

I don't ever having to fact check prior to 2016.

I do the same in checking valid reputable sources on both sides, ignoring opinion pieces, and find MOST ALL AGREE every time on anything substantive.

Problem is the fringe "sources" skew facts, and even videos.

Then, knowing facts and truth, I allow myself to listen to opinions, and in doing so learn the maturity level of those folks, and gradually whittle down those folks al.

Valid news media like the Times, Post, etc pretty much have editorial process in place that insures you are getting the straight scoop.

[Bucco]

This, the rest of your praise for the Times, and your condescending observations regarding those who don’t agree with you, are nothing but your opinions.

I will say that I don’t consider the Times quite as unjournalistic as the Post, but that’s not saying much.

Curious...do you have a specific reason for your doubts ?

I ask because they are both internationally respected, and have been for many many years, thus my question.

However, if you find my post to be condescending when it is simply a known and accepted world wide fact, I can only imagine your comments to my question.

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts (https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/?sh=2dfee186e9b5)

[Polar Bear]

Curious...do you have a specific reason for your doubts ?...
I don’t have doubts. I know how I feel about them.
...I ask because they are both internationally respected...
By many I do not question. There are also many who don’t.

And regarding your post being condescending...
...but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.
If somebody wanted to put together an example of condescending quotes, this would fit right in.

[Going My Way]

However, if you find my post to be condescending when it is simply a known and accepted world wide fact, I can only imagine your comments to my question.

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts (https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/?sh=2dfee186e9b5)

Just the Runner Up List from your LINK scares me.... :eek:

[paulajr]

"Fact Check" sites are all biased...so why bother!?

[graciegirl]

It's time to retire the comment/tweets ”Fake News”.

Fake News is not exactly an accurate wording. Almost all of the mainstream media show their opinions rather than give just an accurate presentation of what happened, when it happened and how it happened. They are always adding why they think it happened... AND most of even the accurate media is biased left. Couple that with derisive facial expressions and raised eyebrows and eye rolling...it does manage to communicate disdain and derision. That is a fact. Although half of the country is right of center, we are subjected to the opinion of the Television News and National News Channels that almost all are very biased and left leaning.

They don't lie. They use descriptors that are demeaning and critical and unkind. They will say he "scoffed at" instead of he was "critical of" . There are so many examples, over and over every day from all of the even responsible news sources that would make my excellent high school journalism teacher wet her socks.

Those who think the way the writers write don't see it or feel it or find issue with it. I do. Every damned day.

[Taltarzac725]

Some "news" sources are more entertainment than "news". And they are very easy to spot.

[Bucco]

Fake News is not exactly an accurate wording. Almost all of the mainstream media show their opinions rather than give just an accurate presentation of what happened, when it happened and how it happened. They are always adding why they think it happened... AND most of even the accurate media is biased left. Couple that with derisive facial expressions and raised eyebrows and eye rolling...it does manage to communicate disdain and derision. That is a fact. Although half of the country is right of center, we are subjected to the opinion of the Television News and National News Channels that almost all are very biased and left leaning.

They don't lie. They use descriptors that are demeaning and critical and unkind. They will say he "scoffed at" instead of he was "critical of" . There are so many examples, over and over every day from all of the even responsible news sources that would make my excellent high school journalism teacher wet her socks.

Those who think the way the writers write don't see it or feel it or find issue with it. I do. Every damned day.

When do you believe all the things you critique began ?

Been around politics pretty much my entire adult life....it’s new to me.

[Bucco]

I don’t have doubts. I know how I feel about them.

By many I do not question. There are also many who don’t.

And regarding your post being condescending...

If somebody wanted to put together an example of condescending quotes, this would fit right in.

Ok...enjoy..have a nice evening

[ruralgoddess]

amen

[mrrmauu]

Don't use them....read established media with strong principaled editorial practice.

Frankly, as we have seen, most stories have tapes or videos as back up.

Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.

:a20:Whew lad! :a20: You sure are stretching the term “reputable” :a20:. Thanks for the early morning chuckle!

[Worldseries27]

With all due respect,

never,

ever,

again.

[ChrisTinaBruce]

Journalists biases, although a natural human tendency, use to be some what tempered. Cronkite, Wallace, Reasoner, Schieffer, Rather all had political leanings not to difficult to ascertain. The difference between then and now is the lack of critical thinking, individualism, and self reliance taught to our children. Thereby a generation of self centered and entitled people are providing validity to the current entertainment news media and agendas.

[bruce213]

Google media bias chart. It shows which news sources are more left, more right and which are more center.

[JimJohnson]

Well, now the future looks more truthful and facts will be back in our lives
:bigbow:

[Bay Kid]

Let's be honest the only person you can believe is your Mother and I'm not sure about her anymore.

[Two Bills]

It is what the news services leave out of reports, that shows their bias.
That is why it important to read as many sides of a story you can, if you want to make a calculated shot at the truth.
JMO

[rgoosman]

Fact check? Most use Google. Google is who turned me off 441 to 466A going to Lowe's only to put me back on 441 and then said go 38 miles. I think I heard a little laugh on the GPS.

[Nick B]

Just ask Joe and Ho
Does that make you feel better? How about 1 and done!

[JanetMM]

Just ask Joe and Ho

Hey Moderator

[Andyb]

Someone needs to fact check the fact checkers. All I can tell you is that Americans are being manipulated, misguided, lied to and deceived.

[Bill1701]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

Everything that is not a complete mystery is just based on guesswork.

[Bucco]

Journalists biases, although a natural human tendency, use to be some what tempered. Cronkite, Wallace, Reasoner, Schieffer, Rather all had political leanings not to difficult to ascertain. The difference between then and now is the lack of critical thinking, individualism, and self reliance taught to our children. Thereby a generation of self centered and entitled people are providing validity to the current entertainment news media and agendas.

The difference is a full 30 to 60 minute broadcast to cover all the news versus cable news channels 24 hours a day with not enough news, thus guests and opinions. Conspiracy theories, thankfully, never saw the light of day. Fringe groups were exactly that....on the fringe.

News is still the news...opinion is still opinion. We have changed also in that we now have so many vehicles to check until we find "news" we like.

[Bucco]

Someone needs to fact check the fact checkers. All I can tell you is that Americans are being manipulated, misguided, lied to and deceived.

Example ?

[joseppe]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

Facts do nothing but cloud the issue. "In God we trust" without any facts to prove her existence. You don't need facts when you have faith that something is right. :shocked:

[RoadToad]

Someone needs to fact check the fact checkers. All I can tell you is that Americans are being manipulated, misguided, lied to and deceived.

Yes, But it should get better now :a040::a040:

[jebartle]

Facts do nothing but cloud the issue. "In God we trust" without any facts to prove her existence. You don't need facts when you have faith that something is right. :shocked:

Fact checking of course should be based not on your political persuasion but on the cumulation of all facts and then and only then, YOUR conclusion. Hopefully Americans will listen, study and then conclude, but this requires effort. Misinformation is based on Americans getting their info from social media or cable opinion pieces but if those same folks would go to reputable sources, the truth will more than likely be the result.

[Worldseries27]

i do the same in checking valid reputable sources on both sides, ignoring opinion pieces, and find most all agree every time on anything substantive.

Problem is the fringe "sources" skew facts, and even videos.

Then, knowing facts and truth, i allow myself to listen to opinions, and in doing so learn the maturity level of those folks, and gradually whittle down those folks al.

Valid news media like the times, post, etc pretty much have editorial process in place that insures you are getting the straight scoop.
i wish we can take your last paragraph and smoke it

[richs631]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

The problem with fact checking is the people who do fact checking

[Worldseries27]

i do the same in checking valid reputable sources on both sides, ignoring opinion pieces, and find most all agree every time on anything substantive.

Problem is the fringe "sources" skew facts, and even videos.

Then, knowing facts and truth, i allow myself to listen to opinions, and in doing so learn the maturity level of those folks, and gradually whittle down those folks al.

Valid news media like the times, post, etc pretty much have editorial process in place that insures you are getting the straight scoop.
yes, i've seen those scoops on the shelf next to the immodium a&d extra strength. No prescription required

[Worldseries27]

i suppose it could be.

But, the times is considered the single best source for news in the world. I have been reading the times, among others for many years, and knowing the journalistic exercise the reporters are required it is a great source.

I also suppose, well i know...attitude of the reader is important. I have gone to the news "above the fold" in the times, expecting to read certain news, only to be disappointed in what happened. That helps me, because i approach my news as a learning experience, and not a validation of what i think.

The summary, usually on page 2 is a great way to begin your day.

I seldom read the times opinion pieces, not because i disagree, but i prefer to make my opinions based on the facts. Now, admittedly, i have left the times and checked other sources...never a cable news show, and if needed continue to read.

Reuters is a good source....pbs is usually dependable.

Again, attitude of the reader is important. If you are looking for factual news, i, and most of the world consider the times top notch, but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.
the funeral for the times has had an open coffin for the last several years

[banjobob]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.

A famous politician said “ we don’t need facts we need truth”

[Bonnevie]

Just ask Joe and Ho

what did you just call our VP-elect?

[jimh24444@gmail.com]

Lots of misinformation out there. It's so easy to check your fact checking source.
Wikipedia gives you different answers to the same question depending on the algorithm the AI has set up for you. Same with others sources. AI is controlling all answers. See "Social Dilemma" on Netflix if this is news to you.