I mean really guysâŠ
Youâre being a judgmental nerd. Iâve seen that movie twice and I would have missed it if it was my job to find things like jokes buried in bullshit troll job stories. The Monty Python Skit sounds downright sensible compared to what weâve been hearing, I might have even thought it was an improved look for the CHAZ.
It was a great troll job. 10/10.
the fact that reddit is being used as a source for a the largest news network in the country is a large problem.
This isnt very constitutional, but i sometimes wonder if it would be a better to only allow news to be reported every other day to ensure that its not always just a race for first, and due diligence and actual journalism is practiced.
I missed that part, and youâre right.
Iâm very opposed to the notion of reporting anything anyone says on the internet as fact, aside from âverifiedâ accounts where it is clear who is saying what.
reddit, myspace, AOL, my local BBS in the early 90âs, none of it deserves to be reported as significant news.
Thank the millennials for that. Social media is considered a reliable news source by them.
Maybe. But itâs funny and obvious to me. The redditer even threw in the sword reference.
As you and Cali mentioned, more problematic is the fact Reddit was even considered a viable option for sourcing.
Problematic yes. Surprising, no.
I dunno. Maybe Iâm sheltered or something but I never thought a news service would use Reddit
Itâs not news, itâs theater.
Iâd be down for a solution but itâs widespread. Even in things other than politics itâs such a race for clicks and everything else that sites will shoot an article up based off something they read on a different website. So if the original wasnât well sourced now someone else has ran the same thing.
Be quick get the clicks generate revenue, repeat. The consequences for being wrong donât seem to be any issue anyways. Fox had the fake pictures thing recently as well. Do we have any doubt that they will continue being very popular? Of course not.
It seems like for websites and shows (and not just politics but obviously we tend to value their accuracy the most) the message is itâs better to be fast and possibly wrong than slow and definitely right.
So my wife, in spite of my advice, was watching MSNBC. The host of whatever show it was said that police in Atlanta âmuderedâ an âunarmed man.â First off, murder is determined by the courts. But I guess it makes you sound more woke to say murder and makes it clear what side you are on. Unarmed? He was armed with a Tazer and no one has disputed that. Somehow armed and unarmed have new definitions. She even said, when showing the video of Brooks fighting with the police, that he âallegedlyâ took a copâs Tazer. Allegedly? You can see it in his hand on the video and again, no one has disputed that fact. This âreportingâ not only lacks objectivity but it only serves to fan the flames and create a false narrative. Why? To look more woke than the other guy? To get ratings? And donât get me started on all the âexpertsâ they interview and their advice and suggestions on how to deal with people (criminals) that they have no experience dealing with. Criminals are not very smart. They are violent. They lack impulse control. They have a lifetime of making bad and irrational decisions. Yeah, some college professor has the solution for dealing with people like that, he even wrote a book about it.
Obviously a generalization but I agree. And you donât reason with an irrational, impulse driven person who has a weapon.
/Disclaimer I havenât seen the video at all, just the headline
Itâs easy to Monday morning quarterback the copâs decision to shoot. Maybe he shouldnât have. My point is, it is very easy to say that cops should do this or that or that we should have social workers respond to some calls instead of cops. The problem is, the people who say these things donât know the kind of people we are talking about. They have never been around criminals and sociopaths. Some people will inevitably resist arrest. They will go from zero to 100 as soon as a cop puts hands on him. This is why cops will sometimes be âroughâ when cuffing someone. They are preparing for that possibility of resistance. I think a lot of people have this idea that criminals are like the characters in Shawshank Redemption or something. They are more likely to be of low intelligence (a nice way to say dumb), quite possibly borderline cognitively deficient (what we used to call retarded or slow), or sociopaths. Itâs easy in writing or in interviews to spout theory on how to deal with these kinds of individuals but another when you are in the actual situation.
The other part of this that is driving me crazy is people saying the cops could have sent him home in a cab. You donât get to drive drunk with the only consequence being getting a cab ride. Just like you donât get to assault cops, steal a taser, actually FIRE the taser at a cop and then just get to walk away.
Especially when you already have a DUI conviction on your record and were serving a prison sentence but got paroled because of Covid. But he was a good man. A lifetime of bad decisions is what killed him. I repeat, he was a good man.
I think ive brought this up before, but it seems like the disconnect is the public expecting Police to take on more risk doing their jobs, than what police currently find acceptable. The public wants less risk for suspects/civilians, which consequently means more risk for LEOs.
Because it would be harder for them to raise their kids to not be criminals and reduce the risk that way. The best way to stay poor is to not accept accountability.
Iâve heard this claim about Rayshard Brooksâ criminal record, but I canât seem to find any sources confirming it. I am curious if there is a primary source confirming that he had prior DUIs and had been paroled from prison (some claims seem to be that he was in prison for child abuse).
This is either a nefarious lie perpetuated about a dead man, or a coordinated coverup by the mainstream media refusing to actually cover information relevant to the story. Both seem possible, but Iâm interested to know which is the case.
What does it change?