occupy san diego-issuing death threats

[Rapscallion]

Youtube is like wikipedia IMO. Anyone can post stuff thus it's not credible.

On Youtube you can get many views, so you're able to make your own decisions. On Fox, you only get one view. Makes it a touch harder to get an alternate viewpoint.

Rapscallion

[Greenday]

On Youtube you can get many views, so you're able to make your own decisions. On Fox, you only get one view. Makes it a touch harder to get an alternate viewpoint.

Rapscallion

And yet the core of the story is still there on Fox despite the spin. You just have to actually watch or read or listen.

[Andara Bledin]

On Youtube you can get many views, so you're able to make your own decisions. On Fox, you only get one view. Makes it a touch harder to get an alternate viewpoint.

And that view has been edited and polished to give, in some cases, a completely fabricated report.

And yet the core of the story is still there on Fox despite the spin. You just have to actually watch or read or listen.

No. No it's not. The fact that anybody trusts that the core is sound is depressing.

^-.-^

[Rapscallion]

And that view has been edited and polished to give, in some cases, a completely fabricated report.

Perhaps true of Fox, but when it's mobile phone footage from different people and from different angles, it's far harder to fake.

Rapscallion

[Greenday]

No. No it's not. The fact that anybody trusts that the core is sound is depressing.

So, I should begin denying the facts. Got it!

[Andara Bledin]

So, I should begin denying the facts. Got it!

What I was trying to say is that they so twist the core, that you can't even trust that much out of them. They have no interest in truth or actual facts; just enough to keep them from being sued for slander or libel, most likely.

I might trust some of their sources if they were otherwise verifiable. I don't trust them to do anything more than to continue to sell opinions as fact packaged as entertainment that looks like news.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

If you go in it expecting twists, slander, etc., you should be able to determine what's twist and what's the actual information pre-twist.

[Gravekeeper]

If you go in it expecting twists, slander, etc., you should be able to determine what's twist and what's the actual information pre-twist.

So your argument now is "My source isn't credible, reliable or unbiased, but you should already know that and just try to figure out if there's a shred of truth to anything they say"?

You can't be serious, dude. If you're presenting the source, that's your responsibility in a debate. Not ours.

[blas87]

I won't deny that citing Fox news as a source is probably not the best of ideas, but it would seem lately with this "Occupy" stuff, there are a few people that are all but denying the possibility that maybe, just maybe, people may be vandalizing property, making threats, being public nuisances, etc, and that it's not all police brutality or the fat cat "Da man" holding them back from their First Amendment rights.

[Hyena Dandy]

Despite the Rarity of it, I agree with Blas. I don't see why I shouldn't believe they made death threats. It sounds like the sort of thing EWs do all the time, and I don't know why there wouldn't be any EWs in Occupy.

They're only people, after all... It doesn't reflect on the movement, but I don't see why I should think it didn't happen...

[Gravekeeper]

I won't deny that citing Fox news as a source is probably not the best of ideas, but it would seem lately with this "Occupy" stuff, there are a few people that are all but denying the possibility that maybe, just maybe, people may be vandalizing property, making threats, being public nuisances, etc, and that it's not all police brutality or the fat cat "Da man" holding them back from their First Amendment rights.

And these few people are?

[blas87]

http://gothamist.com/2011/11/02/occu...n_worker_a.php

And if you want to skip the background, at the very end, it's admitted, there will be good and bad going-ons at this sort of thing!

But I'm sure with the anti-police attitude going on with the deniers, I'm sure there's some way of excusing the guy.

[Gravekeeper]

But I'm sure with the anti-police attitude going on with the deniers, I'm sure there's some way of excusing the guy.

I don't see any deniers there. Nor would an anti-police attitude mean "deny crimes occurred" either. -.-

[Rapscallion]

And yet the core of the story is still there on Fox despite the spin. You just have to actually watch or read or listen.

Sorry - I thought someone else would have taken the easy one while I watched.

The problem is that while on here we have a relatively intelligent membership, able to think about the subjects involved, out in the real world there are many who read the headlines and ... that's about it. If they read any further they only remember the soundbites.

At least on youtube you're presented with more than one version of something controversial on a page. On Fox? Our way is the only way.

Rapscallion

[Greenday]

So your argument now is "My source isn't credible, reliable or unbiased, but you should already know that and just try to figure out if there's a shred of truth to anything they say"?

You can't be serious, dude. If you're presenting the source, that's your responsibility in a debate. Not ours.

Didn't say Fox isn't credible or reliable. Just biased.