Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Yeah, that’s a pretty bad example. What I’m saying is that they do tell the full story, or at least they have a reputation of doing that, and they’re very good at verifying their sources and the information presented.
Again, what you’re suggesting is that the context we’re missing could change the story, and by leaving it out Press Progress is manipulating the story. This goes completely against their reputation for factual reporting, and we have no reason to believe that to be true based on their history of reporting.
The problems with bias are not all created equal. Press Progress carries a bias while remaining factual and doing their proper due diligence. That is not true of all bias outlets, but suggesting that bias = poor standard or untrustworthy information is also not true.
Regarding the information in hand. Have you read the messages? They are what they are. I didn’t see them as “awful” as some people, but I get it. And there’s enough context there to know and understand what she’s talking about. What I’ve also seen is Ford fail to deny writing them (and even accepting their existence as legitimate). So what are we missing?
|
Let’s be honest here. If press progress didn’t have a huge axe to grind to a certain party they would have tackled it differently. IE posted everything.
Like I’ve said in every post. You can judge a media outlet by what they post. Press progress allegedly had all the convo and only shares some.
But I suspect they only bought the inflammatory parts (i agree with your last paragraph)
I’ll be a little open. I know the candidate but I also know another candidate that I supported that lost.
But I no longer live In that riding so don’t know what to think haha.
Second Edit: I’ve been drinking so maybe don’t take me full? Ha