Do you believe fake news?

[Silverstarqueen]

And Trump regularly claimed he was smarter than all other experts, knew more than the generals about war. So when he said something, it was NOT discounted by his followers. I am certain many thought just what he said was true. And what could journalists have done about it? If they questioned him on anything, he either insulted them, gave some answer to avoid admitting he was wrong, prevented them from attending press briefings, and found ways to make their lives miserable. Journalists are not medical experts and should not be putting their opinion into a press briefing anyway.
All they can do is, in all fairness show the actual video so there is no question what actually happened and the context, attitude (not joking) of whomever they are filming. It's up to Trump to correct the record if that's not what he wanted to say, or if he even changed his mind later after consulting his health advisors (which is what he should have done in the first place).
The journalists job is to present the news, not make it. So someone else would have to come forward to be interviewed as to their opinion of the president's suggestion. Who would be brave enough and crazy enough to correct the president? Not many.
Disinfectants:
Alcohol. In the healthcare setting, “alcohol” refers to two water-soluble chemical compounds— …
Chlorine and Chlorine Compounds. Hypochlorites, the most widely used of the chlorine …
Formaldehyde. Formaldehyde is used as a disinfectant and sterilant in both its liquid and gaseous …
Glutaraldehyde. Glutaraldehyde is a saturated dialdehyde that has gained wide acceptance
Vinegar.
Iodine
None of these are great things to inject into the lungs. Nor is saline for that matter.
Even some of the disinfectants for humidifiers have caused lung problems for some of those exposed.
so if anyone (other than a pulmonologist) suggests injecting disinfectant into your lungs for any reason, just say "No".

[my5cents]

After watching Global news a few times last few weeks I'll comment here.
The news might not always be purposely fake, however it is very much driven by the need of this new society.
Its pushed to always paint a picture, be slightly misleading or done in such a way to create and support other agenda's and campaign's.
Of the stories, 3 of them struck me as being very poorly portrayed to the people all to make a story be more extreme, and leaning towards a certain bias. Seems the same bias-ness of issue's in our society is how the news likes to play their stories.
In these 3 stories, the pictures had nothing to do with the story. In fact one story showed a location and and item that's not even in this province. But the picture definitely would get your attention more than if it was about the real location.
Then the other 2, full, very important information was left out. Like on purpose as it would definitely would have left the watchers with a different view.
So, maybe not fake, but very much created to adhere, follow, lean support in a certain direct as the main purpose of the story.

I agree with you liisgo. Sometimes just a certain word leads the listener. What's in a word ? It's just a choice of words. Right ?

"Angry parents smashed two windows at City Hall today." (it's not completely their fault they were angry, they were made angry, likely for a good reason)

"Out of control parents smashed two windows at City Hall today." (No excuse for this type of action, they were out of control).

Another scenario is the manipulated reporter -

In 2019 there was a rock slide on Hwy 97 just North of Summerland. The highway contractor created a bypass beside the slide area while the slide was cleaned up and stabilized.

This is the article in Castanet - https://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton ... -on-locals

In this case the source of the article's information was the Board Director of the Wine Country Chamber of Commerce, Daryl Clarke. In the article Clarke, got the ear of a reporter that wasn’t adverse to printing grey information, or at least not interested in checking facts. The article entitled “Hwy closure hard on locals”, maintained that “It’s almost like we’ve had a snow day for the last two weeks because of the road has slid and nobody knows what to do”.

At the time the article was published the Callan Road detour had been completed and in actuality, traffic, including trucks, were travelling unimpeded South and North on Hwy 97. The article stated that “trucks over 3.8 meters in width can only use the Callan Road detour around the rockslide site from midnight to 5 a.m. Otherwise they are forced to use far longer service road detours.”

It went on to say that “this inconvenience combined with over a week of full closure on the highway has been a headache for local businesses…..Everything that comes to Penticton comes in a truck, and unfortunately when they stop those trucks they stop commerce and trade, the stores can’t restock, we can’t ship our products.”

Clarke’s statement was supposedly a plea for locals to continue to shop in Penticton and support local business, but the information contained in the article left the reader to understand that the shelves were nearly bare, with the impression TRUCKS CAN’T GET THROUGH EXCEPT MIDNIGHT TO 5:00 AM. So how is the local shopper supposed to support business if the shelve are empty ??

Well the trucks that can’t get through during normal hours are oversized, R E A L L Y OVERSIZED.

The average semi, the kind that would normally deliver goods to “RESTOCK” or to “SHIP OUR PRODUCTS” is 2.59 meters wide. An oversized permit is required for vehicles 2.6 meters wide or over. Vehicles that are over 3.5 meters wide are required to have pilot vehicles.

This article is talking about vehicles 3.8 meters wide, and intimating that shelves aren’t getting stocked because they aren’t allowed through during normal hours !!!! For us non metric types, the average semi is 8’6” wide, vehicles over 12’6” wide can only get through the bypass midnight to five. When’s the last time you saw a 12’6” wide load with a pilot car dropping off groceries at your local supermarket ?????

So sometimes reporters don't create the fake news, they get manipulated by misinformation and don't check facts.

[rustled]

...............IF THE JOURNALISTS HAD DONE THEIR JOB, instead of doing what you have been doing here: taking the opportunity instead to engage in the promulgation of a fake news story intended to denigrate Trump, rather than discuss whether or not doctors were determining if whole lung lavage could prove to be a useful treatment.

"instead of doing what you have been doing here"....."promulgating a fake news story intended to denigrate Trump" ???

What ! ? Quoting Trump, is spreading a fake news story ???? Are you kidding ?

"intending to denigrate Trump"... I don't think Trump needed any help in that area.

The media, should have what ? said: "What we think what Mr Trump meant was....." what ? lavage one's lungs with bleach ?

It's still nuts ! There was no excuse for saying what he said at the White House briefing. "but what he meant was...", "he was just thinking out loud" and my favourite "he didn't say that"

No he wasn't "thinking out loud", it was out loud but didn't involve "thinking".

During his run up to becoming president and during his term, how many times did Trump do or say something completely false or stupid, or as in this case, ridiculously stupid ?

As I see it, this silliness is the problem in a nutshell.

It's one thing for people on social media to misunderstand and/or intentionally misconstrue. It seems likely to me that had any other president made the same suggestion with the same wording, the journalists would have done their jobs. Instead, they made as much hay as they could, as do folk like yourself on social media. It's an interesting microcosm of the problem of shoddy journalism/fake news. The story that should have been about whether or not whole lung lavage might be useful in treating covid ended up being all about "Trump suggesting people should inject bleach into their own lungs - what an idiot".

That's silly, superficial nonsense - and not at all what we ought to expect of professional journalists. And it's interesting to me that we've devolved as a community to the place where anyone defends it.

[rustled]

The journalists job is to show the unvarnished truth.

That was their job - manipulating public opinion seems to be their new calling.

Now they can, after the fact (since they had no warning of Trump doing this), interview health experts on the advisability of what Trump was suggesting. And they did that. There was no way to white-wash this without misrepresenting what happened.

No white washing expected or required - just good journalism.

Trump's team tried to do just that, pretend he didn't say what he said, or he didn't mean what he said, and blame the messenger, just as you are doing.

I'm sure he meant what he said - he just didn't use the correct terminology. Funnily enough, we have a president who struggles now to use correct terminology, and he's not subjected to what the media subjected Trump to. The journalists assist the audience in their understanding of who or what Biden refers to, rather than making suggestions about what he has said that make him seem demented.

Now if Trump wanted to come on video later and present at some other news conference where his orginal idea was wrong, or what else could be done, other than injecting disinfectant into the body, he could have done that too. But he made a point of never admitting he was wrong, and would continually blame everyone else for his demise, for "misrepresenting" him, when the video showed exactly what he did.

Ah, so you seem to be suggesting that because Trump was wrong to wonder aloud if whole lung lavage would be useful, and because he used the wrong terminology, that excuses the journalists from doing what they did?

Perhaps we've devolved to where the media can do whatever they like to sensationalize what a head of state says, and it's then up to the head of state to mount a defense.

That's not good journalism.

Look at the difference in how Kenny handled Alberta's reopening. He admitted he had miscalculated, set a new course, and he's going to fix what went wrong. He was trying to give his people hope too, but he made a mistake, admitted it, and I hope he will be respected for that, because he is showing leadership and preparing to do the right thing.

Here's the thing, though: we're talking about the difference between good journalism and fake news, and "do you believe it" - not the difference between Trump and Kenney.

What those "journalists" did was bad journalism, shoddy journalism, sensationalizing and misleading - aka fake news.

[rustled]

And Trump regularly claimed he was smarter than all other experts, knew more than the generals about war. So when he said something, it was NOT discounted by his followers. I am certain many thought just what he said was true. And what could journalists have done about it? If they questioned him on anything, he either insulted them, gave some answer to avoid admitting he was wrong, prevented them from attending press briefings, and found ways to make their lives miserable.

Trump's followers weren't in the room listening to him think out loud. The journalists were. They could have come away from the press availability and done their jobs. The mere fact that folk are still talking about "injecting bleach" or "injecting disinfectant" into lungs shows they didn't do their jobs - they made hay instead.

None of these are great things to inject into the lungs. Nor is saline for that matter.
Even some of the disinfectants for humidifiers have caused lung problems for some of those exposed.
so if anyone (other than a pulmonologist) suggests injecting disinfectant into your lungs for any reason, just say "No".

No one's saying it's a great thing to inject anything into the lungs, no one is suggesting people inject disinfectant into your lungs.

See how you have chosen to avoid any rational discussion of how trained medical professionals use saline during whole lung lavage to disinfect the lungs, and instead offered once again a more sensationalized version of what Trump actually wondered about aloud?

None of this excuses the shoddy journalism that has people still talking the way folk here are still talking about what he said.

This is as good an example as any of people accepting and excusing shoddy journalism, aka fake news, when the narrative suits their purposes.

[d0nb]

Knowing how fake news has convinced some. I not only included the transcript of what Trump stated, but the video. For all to see, hear, and read and to enable others to decide for themselves.

If you read the transcript and watched the video, you have no excuse for continuing to claim that Trump said something that the evidence clearly shows that he did not.

I didn't post the truth to try to convince you or d0nb, that'd be a waste of time. But others need to have the facts presented when fake news is spread.

It's nice to have the facts, but as you have demonstrated, they will often be disregarded when they conflict with preconceived notions.

[d0nb]

None of this excuses the shoddy journalism that has people still talking the way folk here are still talking about what he said.

This is as good an example as any of people accepting and excusing shoddy journalism, aka fake news, when the narrative suits their purposes.

I continue to be astonished by your patience and eloquence.

[Catsumi]

None of this excuses the shoddy journalism that has people still talking the way folk here are still talking about what he said.

This is as good an example as any of people accepting and excusing shoddy journalism, aka fake news, when the narrative suits their purposes.

I continue to be astonished by your patience and eloquence.

#MeToo”

[Jonrox]

The biggest issue is that people seem to think businesses like CNN and Fox News are news organizations. In reality both of them are opinion/gossip/entertainment channels and websites with hardly any journalism going on. Once you realize and understand what they are and what they’re trying to be, you’ll understand their bar for fair and honest reporting is pretty much non-existent. You should take everything they say with a huge grain of salt.

They call themselves news networks but that’s only to get more viewers. They’re first and foremost businesses competing for eyeballs and clicks to sell advertising. Honest reporting and journalistic integrity mean nothing when sensationalism and fear sell so much better.

[two]

Have you read a book written in the 50s by a once famous psychologist Joost Meraloo which examines mass psychosis, titled "The rape of the mind" ? here is the free ebook in a link
https://archive.org/details/TheRapeOfTh ... 1/mode/2up

On two's recommendation, I downloaded and read Meraloo's book and judged it to be an excellent prerequisite for a discussion like this thread.

And now I'd like to revisit one reason why.

Movie at the Ellipse: A Study in Fascist Propaganda

Scholars on the Nazis and anti-Semitism have seen this before

https://www.justsecurity.org/74504/movi ... ropaganda/

On January 6, Trump supporters gathered at a rally at Washington DC’s Ellipse Park, regaled by various figures from Trump world, including Donald Trump Jr. and Rudy Giuliani. Directly following Giuliani’s speech, the organizers played a video. To a scholar of fascist propaganda, well-versed in the history of the National Socialist’s pioneering use of videos in political propaganda, it was clear, watching it, what dangers it portended. In it, we see themes and tactics that history warns pose a violent threat to liberal democracy. Given the aims of fascist propaganda – to incite and mobilize – the events that followed were predictable.

Before decoding what the video presents, it is important to take a step back and discuss the structure of fascist ideology and how it can mobilize its most strident supporters to take violent actions. . . .

I am not a clinical psychologist(or a Trump supporter or a Biden supporter... far from it) The video is definitely trying to make a strong leader weak leader case. Had seen that and the entirety of Trumps speech which continuously states to respect law order and police I still find it hard to believe he planned on and directly inspired the actions of jan6 more then the FBI did.

I believe Trump would love more authoritarian powers(lots of leaders would) and in the fascist sense but I do not think this was not his goal beyond a non violent showing. Still I do not know and cannot know based on the information available.

How did you like the book?

EVERYONE on this forum

I would like to know if anyone considers this mis information ?
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

[Septuagenarian]

Hi Two,

Besides what I said above, I also said this about the book.

Brilliant to post this! The Rape of the Mind is a chilling and foretelling manuscript that should be rededicated to our times.

Two, no wonder it caused you pause and contemplation.

Again, thank you for providing all of us with an opportunity to read it.

And it will long remain on my bookshelf.

All the best to you,

Sept

And, specifically, Rape of the Mind, "Part Two: The Techniques of Mass Submission" (https://archive.org/details/TheRapeOfTh ... 1/mode/2up) seemed to reinforce what I saw as meant by whoever produced, "The Movie at the Ellipse."

Still, I don't know who that was, but I've added some additional information about it in the introduction to a copy shown below.

The Ellipse, January 6th. Trump's Incitement to Revolution, Part 2: The Propaganda Film

Michael M. Ross

This is an almost-unknown video recording of the propaganda film shown after Trump made his speech at the Ellipse on January 6th. It reveals Trump's malign intent without disguise. The film was projected to the crowd on giant screens moments after Trump left the stage.

This part of the event was recorded and posted on YouTube by the Right Side Broadcasting Company - and subsequently it was removed. Fortunately, it was captured by a Vimeo contributor. This is a copy of the version at https://vimeo.com/508134765.

Make up your own mind about it. It appears to be a parody, but it is not.

As well, Jason Stanley, the author of the article, "Movie at the Ellipse: A Study in Fascist Propaganda," explains further:

Jason Stanley: Did This 2 Min. Video Help Incite the Jan. 6 Rioters? | Amanpour and Company

Amanpour and Company

As former president Donald Trump's second impeachment trial enters its third day, the question remains whether his words or actions incited the January 6 assault on the Capitol. But little attention has been paid to a video that was shown that same day, at the January 6 "March to Save America" rally in Washington, D.C. Jason Stanley, a scholar of fascist propaganda, claims that this short video -- shown immediately after Rudy Giuliani left the stage, prior to the attack on the Capitol -- was full of themes and tactics that threaten liberal democracy. (Again) Stanley breaks the video down with Hari Sreenivasan and (then) elaborates on its role in the violence that took place on that infamous day.

[Septuagenarian]

Bump.

<snip>

EVERYONE on this forum

I would like to know if anyone considers this mis information ?
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

The video from Two's article:



The PDF of the cited final report.

"A Structural Reevaluation
of the Collapse of World Trade Center

Final Report"

https://files.wtc7report.org/file/publi ... ch2020.pdf

Additional video:

[two]

Hi Two,

Besides what I said above, I also said this about the book.

Brilliant to post this! The Rape of the Mind is a chilling and foretelling manuscript that should be rededicated to our times.

Two, no wonder it caused you pause and contemplation.

Again, thank you for providing all of us with an opportunity to read it.

And it will long remain on my bookshelf.

All the best to you,

Sept

And, specifically, Rape of the Mind, "Part Two: The Techniques of Mass Submission" (https://archive.org/details/TheRapeOfTh ... 1/mode/2up) seemed to reinforce what I saw as meant by whoever produced, "The Movie at the Ellipse."

Still, I don't know who that was, but I've added some additional information about it in the introduction to a copy shown below.

I'll read that part 2 after I finish "the crowd". We are living in a strange time. I recently bought some of Marcus Tullius Cicero books to.. lots of reading to do. I checked out all the information you sent me, interesting stuff.

[two]

Bump.

<snip>

EVERYONE on this forum

I would like to know if anyone considers this mis information ?
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

The video from Two's article:



The PDF of the cited final report.

"A Structural Reevaluation
of the Collapse of World Trade Center

Final Report"

https://files.wtc7report.org/file/publi ... ch2020.pdf

Additional video:

They should let a independent investigation happen.

[my5cents]

Apparently the answer to the question "Do you believe fake news ?" is "Yes"

If you want the truth read: https://www.popularmechanics.com/techno ... 4/4278874/

Why do people work so hard to find conspiracy theories ?