Nice first post. :ohdear:
Steve

WHO is spinning, WH, news source or Richard Engel, hmmmm! Only the wizard knows!

I did search and this is what Media fact check says about Patriot Post:
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

In other words, it is a biased news source, not to be trusted.

The newspaper owner is also The Developer.
Not likely to run a story calling the place a dump, and you would be better off buying somewhere else are they?
Any way, my wife likes the crossword, house sales, or no house sales!!

Interesting......

Here we have a story that is 100% accurate, but with. A very questionable headline.

Last night and this morning, regarding a patriotic war hero testifying before congress today, on one of the most watched networks, they are questioning his patriotism, suggesting he may be a double agent, etc, and the WH is in full character assisination mode. So, in this case, NO FACTS, just attack for some reason.

I will take the source with facts and truth.

Honest question...who checks the fact checkers for accuracy, bias, etc.?

Bingo! Give that Bear a Cigar!

I have a feeling someone has the answer PB all we have to do is wait a bit. :read: CARNAC THE MAGNIFICENT will be here with the answer shortly! I wish I had the answer?? I dunt! :duck:

Even though I'm sure I'm not Carnack, here goes something.
The Facts About Fact-Checkers | The Heritage Foundation
Who Is Fact Checking The Media Fact Checkers?
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

More to follow I'm sure

Steve

I think, if you watch national news and want to know what is going on................you need to watch both a right-wing and a left-wing channels and the "truth" is somewhere in between.


:pray:

I agree.

Would be best not to inject politics into this discussion and instead stick to the topic of the thread

Topic is news coverage and I agree with you.

I am comparing critiquing a headline and ignoring the accuracy of the story...

To

A manufactured story with no facts with much twisted information.

Fair, actually not fair.....broadcasting on a news network things that are not true simply to go after the character of a hero vet serving his country and broadcasting as if true.....well, THAT serves as a great example of cheap and sham journalism, from a source oft quoted on this very forum.

My reference to the WH seems fair, as a number of folks have done so already, and much of what is coming from there, if not all began on that same network.

NOT political unless you see it somewhere.........WH coverage of the killing of a very bad man has been referenced and never challanged by anyone.

Not discussing politics.....speaking to NEWS coverage or lack there of which is the absolute subject here.

I cannot imagine discussing news coverage without speaking to phoney and false broadcasts.

You usually can check this for yourself by doing some research. You do have the world at your fingertips.

GREAT QUESTION, AND for me, I never ever have used fact checkers except a few years ago as that genre was emerging.

Much too easy to do your own actually

Spot on Tal. Information is available to check accuracy on almost everything, and it is easy to determine who is lying and who is tellng the truth.....IF you wish to.