patrick.net

>>Other top Trump aides were in frequent contact with Russian intelligence officials, according to US intelligence officials. Paul Manafort and Carter Page have been named as the aides. Not Flynn.

@joeyjojojunior, There is a lot of conflation of any official as being an intelligence official, and a conflation of what one person did with what another person MAYBE did.

In the link name, Flynn is implicated, and the word "intelligence" is used.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-campaign-team-repeated-contact-with-russian-intelligence-michael-flynn/?ref=patrick.net

In the article headline, Flynn is NOT implicated, but "Trump Team" is, and the word "intelligence" is highlighted.

QUOTE headline: Trump team reportedly had repeated contact with Russian intelligence before election

And in the article text, Manafort and Page are implicated, but only for having contact with "officials". Note carefully that only the word "official" and not "intelligence official" is then used. But the net effect is to associate Manafort and Page with Russian intelligence officials.

QUOTE article : Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former campaign adviser Carter Page also reportedly talked to Russian officials last year.

The above is a great example of misrepresentation, fake news and propaganda. The link name, headline and text are all saying different and inconsistent things, but having the net effect of tarring Flynn, Manafort and Page as having had contact with Russian intelligence officials, even if a lawyer might be able to argue that "cbsnews did not actually claim that".

This is how fake news works. Just using your example. FAKE NEWS CAN BE VERY SUBTLE, propganda likewise.

I'm not even sure what you are arguing here. That the name of the link is misleading? Who cares? Nobody gets their news from article link names.

The story reads as if sources told CBS that there is significant evidence of repeated communication between Trump officials and Russian intelligence during the campaign, but the sources didn't share exactly which people are implicated. The author then speculates based on what is known fact.

Without Daddy's money, Trump would be selling pencils at Realtor conventions.

joeyjojojunior says

I'm not even sure what you are arguing here.

Fake news and propaganda is often hidden in the subtle wordings being used. Many readers will conflate certain generic accusations with specific persons mentioned, even if care was taken by the journalist (or propagandist) not to actually mention the accusatory word ("intelligence") and the name of the person in the same sentence.

Am I being too subtle for you ;-) :-)

Trumpligula has ordered 3000 full length and ceiling mirrors in the Orange House, because he likes to watch.

"Fake news and proapganda is often hidden in the subtle wordings being used. Many readers will conflate certain generic accusations with specific persons mentioned, even if care was taken by the journalist (and I use that term lightly) not to actually mention the accusatory word ("intelligence") and the name of the person in the same sentence."

I guess I don't follow because I have no trouble understanding the meaning of words that are written in an article. What are your proposing? That reporters cannot do investigative journalism?

Good point you made in the OP:

Trump does absolutely nothing to restrict the freedom the press.

They are perfectly free to criticize absolutely everything he does all day long. And that is in fact what they do.

justme says

Fake news and proapganda is often hidden in the subtle wordings being used. Many readers will conflate certain generic accusations with specific persons mentioned, even if care was taken by the journalist (or propagandist) not to actually mention the accusatory word ("intelligence") and the name of the person in the same sentence.

You obviously don't know any reporters. The one's I've known just aren't anywhere near that good even if they had the time. Most are simply throwing words in as fast as they can to get the story out. When you hear hoof beats think horses, not okapi.

joeyjojojunior says

I guess I don't follow because I have no trouble understanding the meaning of words that are written in an article. What are your proposing? That reporters cannot do investigative journalism?

Look at what you did there: You conflated my criticism of subtle misrepresentations and propaganda with me wanting to disallow investigative journalism.

Nice!

"Look at what you did there: You conflated my criticism of subtle misrepresentations and propaganda with me wanting to disallow investigative journalism. Nice!"

Not at all. I'm trying to understand your criticism. You acknowledge that they aren't really misrepresenting anything-just that people who read too quickly or without comprehension might mistake the meaning of the story. My question is how is that the reporter's fault? They can only report--they can't control a reader's propensity to misunderstand. Or, in many cases, taint the meaning of the story due to their biases.

"Which part of "Same paper, same date" did you not understand?"

I got that part. Which part of "different markets" did you not understand?

Why do they hate the fun, amoral world of sociopathic manipulation?

"Beyond the lake, stretching to the horizon in every direction, was the stark white of the permanent polar ice pack"

https://www.navalhistory.org/2011/08/11/uss-skate-ssn-578-becomes-the-first-submarine-to-surface-at-the-north-pole

Trumpligula was wearing a hammer and sickle emblazoned halter and open ass chaps during the press conference to deny the Russian rumors.

deepcgi says

The USS Skate surfaced at the ice free North Pole on March 17th 1959.

Yes and they spent days under heavy ice looking for a break in the ice. Read Surface at the Pole by James Calvert skipper of the skate.

Nice bit of bullshit though.

Ironman says

Thanks for proving my point, that two different headlines were printed the same day.

I still remember hearing Trump's speech in Arizona. The newspaper had two very different headlines the same day, because Trump behaved like two very different people the same day. I thought that it was the beginning of the end for him, but apparently people didn't notice or didn't care about the crazy behavior. It was a preview to his weird phone calls with foreign leaders after becoming president.

The WSJ readers were not being manipulated. Everybody who was listening to Trump without critical thought was being manipulated.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-icahn-tajmahal-idUSKBN15L2NB

Icahn to sell closed Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City

Icahn, a special adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump, the original owner of the casino, will sell the Taj Mahal - possibly at a loss - instead of investing the $100 million to $200 million it needs to keep going, according to a statement on his website.

Icahn closed the 26-year-old Taj Mahal in October 2016 after failing to reach a new contract with union employees.

deepcgi says

I cannot possibly count the number of sensational headlines showing why we should freak-out and pay taxes because of retreating ice at Glacier Bay.

Unfortunately for the political crowd, we know precisely where the glaciers were in the early 1700's. Heavy glacial retreat was underway by 1750. They intentionally ignore how the trend began in Glacier Bay more than 150 years before the industrial revolution. This is because the truth would damage the plan for Carbon Taxation.

Hate to break it to you, but there are glaciers other places besides glacier bay. Most glaciers started retreating mid to late 1800's. The industrial revolution was in full swing by the mid 1700's with common use of coal burning steam engines. So you are off by 100 years or so. But hey don't let facts screw you up.

Some things are objective and are either true or false. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 is objectively true.
Other things are subjective, and are neither true nor false. For example, 2 is way cooler than 3.
Some things are objectively true or false, but are unknown. For example, Trump either has syphilis or not. We just don't know.

Trump makes many statements that are objectively false. For example: He claimed that his was the biggest electoral win since Reagan. This is just false. There is no other truth. There are no alternative facts. There is just the truth on the one hand and Trump's lies on the other.

Trump makes other statements that are subjective. For example: He claims that he inherited a big mess. There is no objective definition of what constitutes a mess. So, this is subjective. Other examples would be his statement that America is no longer great and doesn't win.

In many cases, experts agree to a high degree that something is true, but has not been proven. An example would be that humans have contributed to global warming. Experts typically agree based on evidence. Many times statistical evidence is overwhelming. An example would be that a drug trial shows that there is less than 1% chance that the observation was due to chance (P less than 0.01)

Sometimes something has been shown to be very unlikely, but is not accepted by many people including Trump (an example would be immunizations causing autism).

The OP didn't provide much insight, but the topic is interesting and relevant these days.

I suspect that this topic is coming up in regard to Trump, who has launched an ongoing attack on the media. He has also launched an ongoing effort to obscure the truth by repeating what are clearly lies or fringe beliefs. What is happening is that more and more things that should be widely accepted based on solid evidence are being questioned for political reasons.

Ironman says

Do you have a problem with FACTS?

I marked that post as ad hominem. See this post https://patrick.net/1303192/2017-02-20-to-anyone-who-cares?c=1382898#comment-1382898 for a discussion of the difference between facts (objectively true) and subjective statements. You made some subjective statements that were ad hominem. I marked it as such, because it was obvious. If you want to make that post, just do so again and label it for what it is.

zzyzzx says

Icahn to sell closed Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City

Icahn, a special adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump, the original owner of the casino, will sell the Taj Mahal - possibly at a loss - instead of investing the $100 million to $200 million it needs to keep going, according to a statement on his website.

Icahn closed the 26-year-old Taj Mahal in October 2016 after failing to reach a new contract with union employees.

Dumb unions. They did not accept Icahn's offer, and they won't let anyone else accept it either. I'm sure a lot of workers would be ready to accept Icahn's offer.
Now everyone loses. Fucking commies.

"Dumb unions. They did not accept Icahn's offer, and they won't let anyone else accept it either. I'm sure a lot of workers would be ready to accept Icahn's offer.
Now everyone loses. Fucking commies."

Yes, workers should bow down to their "job creators" thanking their lucky stars that anyone would hire them. They shouldn't care what the pay or benefits are. Just say thank you to their master.

joeyjojojunior says

You acknowledge that they aren't really misrepresenting anything-

I did no such thing. Misrepresentation by devious and/or incompetent writing is still misrepresentation.

"I did no such thing. Misrepresentation by devious and/or incompetent writing is still misrepresentation."

OK--could you quote a snippet of the story that you think is devious or incompetent writing that is an example of misrepresentation?

Here's to the 10,000 non Union jobs that will replace them.

When the ecconomy booms and I build my 5 hotels on the Boardwalk my high priced lawyers can argue that Union Labor killed my predecessors.

Oh Goody!

Tenpoundbass says

The Truth is out there, but you wont find it on a Cable channel.

Yes, I agree. But, how will you know?

Dan8267 says

WorkInProgress says

THE TRUTH DOES NOT EXIST.

www.youtube.com/embed/MMzd40i8TfA

This is how all the smug media and politicians see us.

joeyjojojunior says

OK--could you quote a snippet of the story that you think is devious or incompetent writing that is an example of misrepresentation?

How about this one:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-grab-em-comments-unleash-outpouring-of-womens-stories/

At no point does it correctly quote him as saying "they let you do that", where Trump points out that he reliably gets consent from women.

And even in the stories that manage to quote the thing correctly, they completely ignore Trump's point about women consenting as long as you're a "star".

Very disingenuous.

Yes, wtf, how is Icahn going to make another $100MM when those damn workers expect to get paid a liveable wage AND get benefits too?? Don't they realize it's not easy making the payments on a private jet and yacht, and 2 houses in Hawaii, and condos in NY, Paris, London, etc. Those god damn workers and their unions are killing the US.

joeyjojojunior says

http://www.snopes.com/wsj-different-trump-headlines/

This is an example of exactly why I started this post.

Snopes? Habababa!!!

My truth teller is better than your truth teller.

P N Dr Lo R says

WorkInProgress says

Who is your truth teller?

Jesus Christ: The Way, the Truth and the Life.

WorkInProgress says

Is he/she/it better than my truth teller?

Yes.

+1,000

Unions are a necessary counterweight to excessive power by owners.

Unions can become too powerful and ruin businesses, but they also have an important and legitimate function, imho.

"How about this one"

Well, I was asking about the story that prompted the discussion, but as to the one you linked--I still don't see it. The story isn't really even about Trump at all, other than to say that his comment caused a reaction among many women.

And I think, to be fair, a lot of women might disagree with Trump's quote about consent. I agree that women certainly fawn over stars, and rich men get away with a lot more than normal folks, but what Trump thought was consent may not agree with what the women in question would say is consent.

YesYNot says

I suspect that this topic is coming up in regard to Trump, who has launched an ongoing attack on the media. He has also launched an ongoing effort to obscure the truth by repeating what are clearly lies or fringe beliefs. What is happening is that more and more things that should be widely accepted based on solid evidence are being questioned for political reasons.

Trump, Trump, Trump. Habababa!

All politicians and all the media. All the conservatives and all the liberals.

THE TRUTH DOES NOT EXIST!!

Keep firing away.

rando says

Unions are a necessary counterweight to excessive power by owners.

Unions can become too powerful and ruin businesses, but they also have an important and legitimate function, imho.

Private sector unions are fine provided they are smart enough to not bankrupt the owners and all interested parties have a seat at the negotiating table.

But unions have absolutely no place in the Public Sector. It is one of the #1 reasons why California State and Local governments are going broke and our infrastructure is shit - despite very high taxes. The tax payer has no say and public sector unions create a corruption feedback loop with Democrat politicians.

Oh, I almost forgot.....

ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem.

You get it.

Boy they love that hominy!

socal2 says

But unions have absolutely no place in the Public Sector.

I agree. Will add this to my platform at https://patrick.net/1303173/2017-02-19-patrick-net-platform

"But unions have absolutely no place in the Public Sector. It is one of the #1 reasons why California State and Local governments are going broke and our infrastructure is shit - despite very high taxes. The tax payer has no say and public sector unions create a corruption feedback loop with Democrat politicians"

I understand the argument, but the issue isn't unions--it's that the people we elect are so easily corrupted. And it's not a Dem or Rep. issue--local governments are not dominated by either party. People need to pay more attention to local politics and hold school boards, fire boards etc more responsible for controlling costs.