• CableMonster@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sure there is, but you guys dont hear about it because you listen to the lefts corporate media. People that listen to Fox dont do this kind of social media, if you want to insult them use Ben Shapiro, or Larry Elder.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      Didn’t Fox literally claim in court that no one would ever take them at face value? (Or was that just Tucker Carlson?) Why would you want to take anything Fox News says seriously?

      • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        4 months ago

        I dont know, I think both MSNBC and Fox have said something like that as a legal argument. But if it were not clear, I dont listen to Fox or watch cable television, I am in my 40s not 70s.

        • Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think your (pretty solid) point got swallowed whole by your unnecessary “the lefts corporate media” spiel.

          Next time just make your point clear and let it stand on its own.

          • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            4 months ago

            You dont think its important to point out that the left will miss out on facts if they only listen to their news sources?

    • kase@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      You’re saying there is evidence that Biden was involved, correct? Could you provide an example/source?

      • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        It would be what was on the laptop and what he has been doing for and with his son. For example there was “10 for the big guy” thing. And then there is Joe lying about interacting with his sons associates. And then there is why they were all paying his son so much but not getting the influence they were obviously buying. And then Joe getting the prosecutor that was investigating the company his son was getting money from. And a bunch more. There are all kinds of podcasts that will lay it all out and list it if you are actually wanting to know.

        The main problem is they should have an extensive investigation like trump had with russia. At best Joe would have a series of conflicts of interest, but they would need to look into all the things.

          • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            They are only as trustworthy as they are. I think that most corporate news sources mislead at best, and lie directly if it is in their interest. I think there are many podcasts that are not always correct, but they are trying to tell the truth. Do you think mainstream sources are trustworthy?

            • andros_rex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              For the most part yes. Everyone has their biases, which is why I usually check multiple sources. I’m more inclined to trust a source that is run by people who have backgrounds in journalism, who provide their sources. Articles go through professional editors, who can fact check the information. Paid professionals are involved in the process, and stake their reputations on the quality of their reporting. There has certainly been a decline in the quality of mainstream journalism - largely due to mega corps buying up local news - but I will turn to the BBC before I turn to Joe Rogan.

              I find that even podcasts I like and consider informative can often have misinformation. Podcasts are often more focused on entertainment and commentary - it is a different set of priorities.

              • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I can literally point to three stories this week by the corporate media that were false or misleading off the top of my head.

                Why do you keep trusting them when they just report things without thinking or maybe worse, dont report stories because they harm a narative?

                • andros_rex@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Did you determine that they were false or misleading based on Ben Shapiro podcasts? I can point to probably thousands of podcasts that regularly are false or misleading.

                  There are multiple corporate medias. “Corporate media” is not a single organism. I don’t “trust” them - as I pointed out in my previous comment, I critically evaluate multiple sources. (Back in the day, I had an amazing Google Reader setup, Feedly sucks 😢). I tend to discard most science reporting and read the articles directly though my university’s library. For current events, I usually try to find a local news source.

                  I’m not sure why the fact that corporate media can be inaccurate means that we should turn to random, much more likely to be talking out their butts, podcasts on the internet. That seems to be a way to get trapped in an echo chamber that confirms your pre existing beliefs.

                  • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I found them misleading just by using basic logic and listening to podcasts that instantly were able to refute the corporate media sources.

                    The issue with corporate media is that they are directly funded and owned by people with agendas that are not their own. Podcasts can be great, but then also biased, for example anything Ben Shapiro says about Israel is probably wrong.

                    Podcasts are good because they are typically long form and will literally read the story and then point out what is wrong and who is lying. And after a while you can get tell if the podcaster ever lies to you, and you know their bias.