[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Illuminaughty

Well let's start with the gender wage gap myth, that was such a big part of both Hillary and Obamas platforms.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ha...rticle/2580405

That isn't what this article says. The author is not the one who is providing the data, and she is making assumptions based on her cherry picked evidence from a Freak-a-nomics podcast. If you actually listened to the podcast, rather than just reading the erroneous information in the Examiner article, you would have heard Ms. Goldin state that the gender pay gap does exist, that the numbers quoted are accurate, but she goes on to explain why it exists (participation rates, employment choices, special needs like extended health care issues, flexibility in hours, etc.). The author of the Examiner article actually twists Ms. Goldin's words to match her particular frame rather than understanding what Goldin was saying. In fact, if you bothered to actually follow through on Ms. Goldin's research you'd find out that she still firmly believes there is a gender pay gap and stated as much in this interview.

Also, tell me what sites specifically you get your news from? So I know where to focus my search because you seem intent on dismissing all the information out there because it doesn't align with some msm tidbit you came across.

Do you know what empirical data is? Start there. You are presenting anecdotal evidence of your claim, when the empirical data proves otherwise.

FYI I don't use breitbart or reddit as the source of my news. Swing and another miss. Everything has bias to a certain degree.

Bias is a perception issue, not a process issue. The vast majority of mass media follows journalistic standards and complies with a specific series of processes which allow for validation of data and removal of bias. Facts don't lie. Facts don't project bias. The reader, interpreting information from their perspective, is where bias is injected into media. Unless a story is developed with misinformation or disinformation as the basis of data by the author, the facts should stand on their own. This is where empirical data provides the factual basis for the story. No bias exists when the data can be proven to be consistent and reliable when verified and proven reliable.

There is a bunch of stuff out there on the net on pizzagate other then those sites.

Really? A Google search does not present a single reliable source of information for anything called "pizzagate." The only credible media source referencing something called "pizzagate" is in reference to food fight between Manchester United and Arsenal in the UK. How did you put it? Swing and a miss?

Try not being too biased with mainstream media fluff, you might actually learn something sometime.

Try to understand what makes a site credible. What you call credible is embarrassing. How about something that isn't based on anecdotal evidence, hearsay or a narrative? Not only that, you don't even digest the information properly, instead trying to present misinformation and disinformation as factual, when it just isn't.

Maybe there are reasons that the msm doesn't cover certain things, and maybe sometimes those things are legit.

Yeah, they don't cover them because they are based on hearsay and have no facts behind them. Opinion and tabloid journalism is not factual in nature.

You can't possibly believe they don't lie and try to form your world view.

Oh please, please try and educate me on agenda setting theory within the mass media! I am looking forward to this. I can't wait to hear what you think you know about the agenda setting power of the mass media and how it works. If you actually did know anything about the agenda setting power of the mass media you would have a very different perspective than the one you espouse. The agenda setting of the mass media this election cycle was horrific and played into the hands of one candidate.

The Clintons have a history of sexual misconduct and dealings with people with a similar history.

Proof please. That's a serious claim and you need to back it up. You say you want to engage in serious debate, well put on your big boy pants and start backing up your claims with credible sources of information.