What's new
By:

very fake news strikes again

D

DutchJazzer

Banned
WSJ royally ****ed up!!!!!!!

nuf said.

dont have to go into details because lefties will not beleive it, and tkae the side of WSJ\

the right is always right! and they understand
 
I thought this was about Trump's impeachment. I read that the hearings are already underway. He should be ousted by August at the latest.
 
seeing as most videos covering this have been deleted or contain swear words

here is the short of it, cant go into long explenation and cant post videos about it seeing as i will surly get a lifetime ban

WSJ combed you tube for "racist" videos, after the whole pewdie pie controversy. seemed like they finally found certain advertiser where advertising on videos with the N word, and blatantly racist stuff Not just fake "racism: right wing stuff, but really N word in title stuff!

so naturally certina advertisers stopped doing business with google pepsi, Johnson and johnson and other big advertisers


now the whole week youtubers where in constant state of panic as thye see their income drop by up to 80%! all sorts of content, from innocent stuff to what lefties consider triggering!

but turns out these screenshots wsj posted where FAKE! they where photo-shopped/ms-painted etc. i know some of you wont believe it. but consider if its the truth!

wsj did irrepibale damage to the income of you-tubers and yes certain you-tubers have it as full-time job 1 company for example has 15 employees to pay monthly. fake news is a dissease and wsj has been caught for the 2nd time in 5 weekswith their hand in thy lying jar!

i hope they get sued into oblivion never to be heard of again for BLATANTLY LYING! h3h3 production has a youtube video with the proof in it!

cant post it here because yeah he is not a snowflake so he uses some swearwords
 
LogGrad98 said:
I thought this was about Trump's impeachment. I read that the hearings are already underway. He should be ousted by August at the latest.
Click to expand...

nah fake news target isnt just Donald J drumpf! But the right which they cant compete with in the free market of ideas!
 
some people wont take some sources credible, but you can also ook up mike chernovich youtube wsj video!

yes he is triggering to some lefties. but just do some digging y'all and you will find it!
 
I'm gonna take a big bite of some bigly chew and mull these revelations over...

then I'm gonna warm up some butter

heat up my fleshlight in a hot water bath

light some candles

check some of the selfies dutch's mom sent me

and make some sweet creme

all while looking at a pic of some racist frog named pepe that Trump supporters seem to be into

goodnight!
 
DutchJazzer said:
WSJ royally ****ed up!!!!!!!

nuf said.

dont have to go into details because lefties will not beleive it, and tkae the side of WSJ\

the right is always right! and they understand
Click to expand...

But, from your perspective, why would "lefties" take the side of the WSJ? The WSJ is a right wing conservative paper.

https://www.inquisitr.com/4113543/w...3h3-ethan-klein-may-be-wrong-about-wsj-claim/

"The apparent war between the Wall Street Journal and YouTube may have taken another controversial turn after popular H3H3 YouTuber Ethan Klein claimed that the newspaper had faked evidence to slam YouTube’s advertising platform — a salacious allegation that may have turned out to be untrue."


https://kotaku.com/the-pewdiepie-fiasco-one-month-later-1793308126

https://www.israellycool.com/2017/0...d-defending-israel-will-be-collateral-damage/

I'm not sure these articles will clarify the issue you're referencing or not, but the first one claims the WSJ did not push fake news. Anyway, just posting these should they shed light on what you're talking about here, and to point out the WSJ is conservative and right wing, and not an outlet usually embraced by the Left....
 
Last edited:
DutchJazzer said:
WSJ royally ****ed up!!!!!!!

nuf said.

dont have to go into details because lefties will not beleive it, and tkae the side of WSJ\

the right is always right! and they understand
Click to expand...

See, what's confusing here is that, on the one hand, you state the right leaning WSJ really screwed up, and, on the other hand, you state the right is always right.....
 
♪alt13 said:
Lol

The right has gone so nuts that we're now saying that Fox "leans" right?
Click to expand...

If you start with a baseline composite of all other major networks and consider mean and median leanings of that composite as centrist, then yes, you would see Fox News as much more than leaning right. But that's in light of considering, as a given, the alternatives more approximate a true center.
 
infection said:
If you start with a baseline composite of all other major networks and consider mean and median leanings of that composite as centrist, then yes, you would see Fox News as much more than leaning right. But that's in light of considering, as a given, the alternatives more approximate a true center.
Click to expand...

Whatever. He's mocking the "leaning" part, not the "right" part, btw.
 
Siro said:
Whatever. He's mocking the "leaning" part, not the "right" part, btw.
Click to expand...

I think Infection is saying it is only a lean, but seems more like an extreme position relative to the fact that most media is way over to the left.

That's always been the most baffling thing to me about this right vs left BS. I think CNN is a little liberal but not intentionally. Fox is very conservative and it is on purpose 100% and it is how they grip their conservative audience. But to their audience, they see CNN as the propaganda arm of the Democratic party and actually believe CNN deliberately manipulates the truth and buries stories that don't agree with their agenda.
 
Bulletproof said:
I think Infection is saying it is only a lean, but seems more like an extreme position relative to the fact that most media is way over to the left.

That's always been the most baffling thing to me about this right vs left BS. I think CNN is a little liberal but not intentionally. Fox is very conservative and it is on purpose 100% and it is how they grip their conservative audience. But to their audience, they see CNN as the propaganda arm of the Democratic party and actually believe CNN deliberately manipulates the truth and buries stories that don't agree with their agenda.
Click to expand...

The major news networks are a poor source of news, and they are not truly ideological (except for the ideology about maximizing profits). Fox News is "conservative" because a panel of business people sits around discussing how to keep their audience, which consists on average of 70 year old conservatives, watching the network. If shouting about Obama keeps their audience engaged, and enraged, then that's what they'll do. But it isn't sincere. It's just a business decision. Fox having captured the old-white-men-who-watch-TV-news market, CNN fights for whatever is left (TV screens at the gym? Who the **** actually watches that trash?).

Print media is mostly "liberal" leaning because journalists, who are formally educated city-dwellers, tend to be more liberal. So the news comes from that perspective. WSJ editorial pages tend to lean conservative, specially economically, but the rest of the paper still reflects the liberalist perspective.
 
Siro said:
The major news networks are a poor source of news, and they are not truly ideological (except for the ideology about maximizing profits). Fox News is "conservative" because a panel of business people sits around discussing how to keep their audience, which consists on average of 70 year old conservatives, watching the network. If shouting about Obama keeps their audience engaged, and enraged, then that's what they'll do. But it isn't sincere. It's just a business decision. Fox having captured the old-white-men-who-watch-TV-news market, CNN fights for whatever is left (TV screens at the gym? Who the **** actually watches that trash?).

Print media is mostly "liberal" leaning because journalists, who are formally educated city-dwellers, tend to be more liberal. So the news comes from that perspective. WSJ editorial pages tend to lean conservative, specially economically, but the rest of the paper still reflects the liberalist perspective.
Click to expand...

Did you just explain to me what I just said to you?
 
Bulletproof said:
Did you just explain to me what I just said to you?
Click to expand...

I elaborated a bit. I just don't see the rest of the media as way to the left. Which major news organization is far left? They're mainstream liberal, which is a centrist position, as it is shared by something like half of the population.

But I agree about the ideological insincerity of TV news.
 
Siro said:
The major news networks are a poor source of news, and they are not truly ideological (except for the ideology about maximizing profits). Fox News is "conservative" because a panel of business people sits around discussing how to keep their audience, which consists on average of 70 year old conservatives, watching the network. If shouting about Obama keeps their audience engaged, and enraged, then that's what they'll do. But it isn't sincere. It's just a business decision. Fox having captured the old-white-men-who-watch-TV-news market, CNN fights for whatever is left (TV screens at the gym? Who the **** actually watches that trash?).

Print media is mostly "liberal" leaning because journalists, who are formally educated city-dwellers, tend to be more liberal. So the news comes from that perspective. WSJ editorial pages tend to lean conservative, specially economically, but the rest of the paper still reflects the liberalist perspective.
Click to expand...

super accurate summary on the state of news.


One more thing I want to mention-- a lot of print journalists tend to skew centrist as opposed to being staunchly left. I know one journalist mentions it's because a huge portion of current up-and-coming journos tend to come from well-to-do backgrounds, seeing as the early years of writing tend to be impossible if you come from a poorer background. Journalism internships are primarily unpaid, so it's only people coming from wealthier families that can afford to send their kids to DC to work for free or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top