Leftists discard objectivity.


Thought this was hilarious.

Of course liberals are incapable of being objective today, that's so yesterday.

Now vibise and backup can start to refer to their sources as biased, not objective.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....hahaheeheehaha
So a totally biased "news" source calls out others for turning away from attempts to be unbiased. Nice.
 
So a totally biased "news" source calls out others for turning away from attempts to be unbiased. Nice.
Yes, the biased "news" source, the Washington Post, decided objectivity is so yesterday.

It's biased news day!
 
Yes, the biased "news" source, the Washington Post, decided objectivity is so yesterday.

It's biased news day!
Says the guy who quotes the "Daily Caller".
Is the only issue, that the bias they may be presenting isn't yours?
 
Says the guy who quotes the "Daily Caller".
Is the only issue, that the bias they may be presenting isn't yours?

Pixie's big blunder in logic doesn't surprise me. We've all seen it all too often before. But you too?

The difference should be obvious. "The Daily Caller" is not a news outlet, but rather an opinion piece. They have never claimed otherwise. "The Washington Post" however claims to offer objective news. Now they are proclaiming that raw news need not be objective.
 
So a totally biased "news" source calls out others for turning away from attempts to be unbiased. Nice.
What about the article do you find biased or questionable? It is a tad vague in parts and links to other articles concealed behind paywalls..
There is this from her link.

ncreasingly, reporters, editors and media critics (what media critics?) argue that the concept of journalistic objectivity is a distortion of reality. They point out that the standard was dictated over decades by male editors in predominantly White newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world,”
------------------------

It is white males and they have some sort of biased problem with that followed by an evidence-free indictment insinuating they somehow did not do their job or their job was substandard. So what about the fact they were white males have to do with competency? My understanding of objectivity is to depict reality. Like water freezes at 32 degrees F and the racial or sex of the reporters is incidental. IOWs why should that matter? What am I missing here?

How is journalistic objectivity different from plain ole objectivity? If reporting water freezes at 32 degrees then how is reporting on that
a distortion of reality?

They could report water freezes at 30 or 25 and that would be a distortion of reality but what would the fact they are white males have to do with misreporting?
 
Last edited:
Says the guy who quotes the "Daily Caller".
Is the only issue, that the bias they may be presenting isn't yours?
It doesn't bother me you don't care if a US newspaper abandons objectivity.

I never considered yours an objective opinion anyway. You are just a leftist shill from Europe.

 
It doesn't bother me you don't care if a US newspaper abandons objectivity.

I never considered yours an objective opinion anyway. You are just a leftist shill from Europe.


I could be wrong, but I think he's a leftist shill from Australia. I too have often confused him with Temujin. See one leftist shill, you've seen them all.
 
I could be wrong, but I think he's a leftist shill from Australia. I too have often confused him with Temujin. See one leftist shill, you've seen them all.
Oh man, he is still on lockdown waiting for booster number nine.

It's a good thing objectivity is out the window. Laugh out loud, for reals.
 

Thought this was hilarious.

Of course liberals are incapable of being objective today, that's so yesterday.

Now vibise and backup can start to refer to their sources as biased, not objective.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....hahaheeheehaha
Thank you.
In men's group this morning the asst pastor mentioned this. I tried looking for it to read further about it.

This will be interesting.

I wonder how long it'll take before everyone decides to speak in different languages, so they can be genuine, further removing the ability to effectively communicate with their peers....

If you have more, please post it. I'd like to investigate this further.
??‍♂️??‍♂️?
 
It doesn't bother me you don't care if a US newspaper abandons objectivity.

I never considered yours an objective opinion anyway. You are just a leftist shill from Europe.

They aren't abandoning "objectivity" they are recognising that they never had it.
 
I could be wrong, but I think he's a leftist shill from Australia. I too have often confused him with Temujin. See one leftist shill, you've seen them all.
I don't "shill" for the left. I'm not trying to sell anything. I just present my point of view. If you see that as aligning with the left that's your prerogative.
 
Last edited:
What about the article do you find biased or questionable? It is a tad vague in parts and links to other articles concealed behind paywalls..
There is this from her link.

ncreasingly, reporters, editors and media critics (what media critics?) argue that the concept of journalistic objectivity is a distortion of reality. They point out that the standard was dictated over decades by male editors in predominantly White newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world,”
------------------------

It is white males and they have some sort of biased problem with that followed by an evidence-free indictment insinuating they somehow did not do their job or their job was substandard. So what about the fact they were white males have to do with competency? My understanding of objectivity is to depict reality. Like water freezes at 32 degrees F and the racial or sex of the reporters is incidental. IOWs why should that matter? What am I missing here?

How is journalistic objectivity different from plain ole objectivity? If reporting water freezes at 32 degrees then how is reporting on that
a distortion of reality?

They could report water freezes at 30 or 25 and that would be a distortion of reality but what would the fact they are white males have to do with misreporting?
Hey Harry. I may have been a bit knee-jerk on this one considering the Title of the article and the fact that it was posted by Furry.
The issue is that they aren't just reporting on the freezing point of water. Most news isn't as cut and dried as that. I think the perceived issue is that the news was presented from a white male point of view. So it wasn't so much that the news was incorrect or overtly biased but that it was what was deemed newsworthy by people in that stratum of society and the details that impacted them.
By broadening the points of view they draw from, these News agencies are looking to present a more complete picture.
 

Thought this was hilarious.

Of course liberals are incapable of being objective today, that's so yesterday.

Now vibise and backup can start to refer to their sources as biased, not objective.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....hahaheeheehaha
I was objectively convinced WaPOO never had objectivity.
 
Hey Harry. I may have been a bit knee-jerk on this one considering the Title of the article and the fact that it was posted by Furry.
The issue is that they aren't just reporting on the freezing point of water. Most news isn't as cut and dried as that. I think the perceived issue is that the news was presented from a white male point of view. So it wasn't so much that the news was incorrect or overtly biased but that it was what was deemed newsworthy by people in that stratum of society and the details that impacted them.
By broadening the points of view they draw from, these News agencies are looking to present a more complete picture.
You better get on board harry, the white male point of view is the real problem!

My goodness tibby, you've swallowed it all!
 
Back
Top