Forum Thread

I need someone to refute this anti-fact checker video

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 16 1 2 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    A dishonest Trumper claiming to be moderate recently sent this YouTube video to me on Facebook.

    youtu.be/D77CadhzqxM

    I don’t trust it, and I’d like to give him a good rebuttal as to “why”. Can anyone help?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Chris:

    Since many Trump supporters won't stop supporting Trump no matter how many facts you give them, save yourself some time, and don't bother to either (1) fact check their claims or (2) respond at all.

    You may remember that Rudy Giuliani recently said "truth isn't truth" , so there's nothing you can do to convince them otherwise.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Still… There’s a certain catharsis to shutting down their arguments. -_-

    Are the claims in the video not valid though? If not, why not?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    No one?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Christango Wrote: No one?
    There's about 12 other topics on the main screen. Feel free to offer an opinion or a suggestion. Welcome.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    @TJ

    Well all the instances pointed out in the video discrediting Snopes, Politifact and the like. If the guy narrating the video is lying, what can we refute about it without it sounding like cognitive dissonance?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    A good source to use is mediabias/fact check.

    snopes is rated "least biased"

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=snopes

    politico is also rated "least biased"

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=politico

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Can that be enough though? Shouldn’t everything else in the video be addressed? What of MBFC’s credibility?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What does MBFC stand for?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Media Bias Fact Check.

    But anyway, aren't all Trumpers dishonest and liars like their messiah Trump? Who cares about a lying Trumper? If we're talking media bias, look to fox noise (news) for that. Granted, there are some liberal media biased channels, MSNBC, maybe cnn but they give more accurate news reporting than some others, PBS is my favorite, they're pretty (fair and balanced).

    Anyone can record a video.

    flickr.com/photos/66673048@N06/86265228...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes, but can they record a video with well put together supporting arguments? Dennis Prager might be an alt-right propaganda master, but he at least knows how to make his lies seem accurate and believable to those none the wiser. Which makes it all the more important to have people refute the claims in his well put together, yet exceptionally deceptive, videos.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Christango Wrote: he at least knows how to make his lies seem accurate and believable to those none the wiser. Which makes it all the more important to have people refute the claims in his well put together, yet exceptionally deceptive, videos.

    He personally could tear apart his own BS videos, because his arguments are full of the same selective fact checking that he is accusing politico of doing. The big difference is that Politico does call out elected democrats for making false claims, even small ones, but do you see him calling out Donald Trump for Trump's 1000s upon 1000s of misleading statements\tweets\lies, or does he defend Trump by creating the same, well crafted videos, that would make rational people conclude that world is flat or that NASA faked the moon landing?

    A college exercise: Give students the exact same raw factual news video footage of an event. Some of the students are instructed to edit the footage into a 2 minute "pro" video from the footage, others are to create a 2 minute "con" video, and the remaining students are to create a 2 minute unbiased, fact based video.... Bottomline, both the pro and con videos will be factually inaccurate because there is a agenda to promote a specific perspective that will exclude information that does not support their view point. The unbiased video will come the closest to being fully accurate, but it will also contain some inaccuracies simply because it does not contain all the information available. Even the raw footage does not contain all the facts, just what is caught on video.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Your post of yesterday reminded me of an English class that I was monitoring last spring. The day I was there, there was a guest lecturer, a lady who was in the process of starting a "media literacy" class. Her handout included a variety of quotes, each of which had explanations from opposing sources. FOX was mentioned, of course, but the example that has stuck with me involved a fictional character named John Brown.

    His public relations firm put out this quote:

    John Brown passed away suddenly yesterday when a platform he was standing on in front of a large group of people collapsed.

    The local newspaper had a different spin:

    " John Brown was hanged yesterday"

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I mentioned Heather Cox Richardson a few weeks ago, and I have been reading her daily thoughts since that time. Her post from December 26 discusses "disinformation" and "misinformation".

    https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/

    "It's really important to understand that “misinformation” and “disinformation” are different things. “Misinformation” is bad information caused by errors-- someone makes a mistake. “Disinformation,” though, is deliberately false information intended to manipulate public opinion. Another word for disinformation is propaganda."

    She also reminds us that long before Bill Clinton said, "it depends on what the definition of "is" is, or Rudy Giuliani said, "the truth isn't truth", facts in our society were getting bent:

    "In 1951, William F. Buckley, Jr., fresh out of college, wrote a book attacking that consensus by attacking fact-based argument. In God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom,” Buckley said that trying to reach the truth by constructing arguments out of facts—the premise of the Enlightenment-- was a worse superstition than the Dark Age traditions the Enlightenment tried to root out. When presented with fact-based arguments, voters kept choosing the liberal consensus. So far as Buckley was concerned, that consensus flew in the face of God’s laws. So, Buckley concluded, it was imperative to stop arguing based on facts, and simply promote a “Conservative” view of the world by whatever means necessary."

    In 1955, Buckley started The National Review, with the intent of making conservative views more acceptable.

    "The National Review, a magazine which some have called the "bible of American conservatism," has a far right bias. One of the National Review’s core convictions is that centralized government should solely exist to protect citizens’ lives, liberty and property. Describing itself as libertarian, it believes all other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The National Review was given an AllSides Bias Rating™ of far right, a rating with which a majority of community members agree."

    https://www.allsides.com/news-source/national-review

    In 2017, the Media Research Research Center considered giving Sean Hannity the William F. Buckley Award for Media Excellence, but his nomination drew a lot of opposition from conservatives, including Buckley's son Chris:

    https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/21/media/sean-hannity-buckley-award/index.html

    More from Heather ...

    "We now have a president who has made more than 15,000 false or misleading claims in fewer than three years in office, and it has become increasingly clear recently that those lies echo Russian propaganda. Senior officials repeat his claims to the media, creating their own reality."

    It's been reported that Sean Hannity's show often closely follows news from RT (Russia Today") , and there is a reason for that. In July of 2017, Hannity met with Russian officials about a possible show on RT.

    http://ir.net/news/politics/126108/sean-hannity-reportedly-talking-russias-rt-new-show/

    To give you a clearer idea on how wacky the GOP has become, consider the 2012 Republican Party platform of Texas. This tidbit sums up their entire philosophy:

    "Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority."

    In other words, they don't want people to THINK, as long as they just keeping pulling the "R" lever when they vote. THAT'S why Louie Gohmert keeps getting re-elected.

    http://s3.amazonaws.com/texasgop_pre/assets/original/2012Platform_Final.pdf

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Christango Wrote:

    A dishonest Trumper claiming to be moderate recently sent this YouTube video to me on Facebook.

    youtu.be/D77CadhzqxM

    I don’t trust it, and I’d like to give him a good rebuttal as to “why”. Can anyone help?

    Can you give me us the "Cliff Notes" version of what's in the video? I can't stomach a 30 minute pro-Trump propaganda video, even if it is to refute it!