|
Journalists forfeited having their profession taken seriously back when 24 hour news channels went on the air. There isn't enough actual news to actually broadcast that much, so you're forced to fill the airspace with junk and speculation and terrible opinions, and manipulate the story to get the most attention so you can get the best ratings and the highest ad profits. No one reads the articles past the headline, no one listens to the argument after the opening statement. Especially now, the average person has the attention span of a dead fish. If intentionally being deceptive to get the most attention, you're a straight up prick. Argue that it helps all you want, because it doesn't. You're deliberately spreading false information for attention and money and that makes you garbage and a piece of poo poo. It's trash, It's all trash.
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:37 |
|
|
This one I'm screencapping. https://twitter.com/RachelMComedy/status/1142605896960401408 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
Picnic Princess posted:Journalists forfeited having their profession taken seriously back when 24 hour news channels went on the air. There isn't enough actual news to actually broadcast that much, so you're forced to fill the airspace with junk and speculation and terrible opinions, and manipulate the story to get the most attention so you can get the best ratings and the highest ad profits. Journalists didn’t have anything to do with that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
yellow journalism is the default form of journalism. truthful news was only a short experiment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
The offside rule/instant replay is now racist. https://twitter.com/srtaintelectual/status/1142838138781519874 e: Screenshot 
TinTower has a new favorite as of 01:37 on Jun 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
Zesty posted:Whole lot of people giving hot takes on the headline and not reading the article. Yeah, well I just don't like when my shirts get big damp spots under the arms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:28
|
|
|
TinTower posted:The offside rule/instant replay is now racist. This is really where you want to have a screencap for future reference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
Okay someone explain it for those of us who don't know soccer
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
Offsides is called when an offensive player is behind the last defensive player closest to the opposing keeper before the ball is struck. As soon as the ball is struck they can be past that player. The blue line is where they are calling the back foot of the defensive (England) player. The red line is where the offensive player (Cameroon) foot is located. If you watch it in real time it looked good but with video review it was deemed offside.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
calandryll posted:Offsides is called when an offensive player is behind the last defensive player closest to the opposing keeper before the ball is struck. As soon as the ball is struck they can be past that player. The blue line is where they are calling the back foot of the defensive (England) player. The red line is where the offensive player (Cameroon) foot is located. If you watch it in real time it looked good but with video review it was deemed offside. What's up with that Cameroon player way in the corner? Or is that a ref?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
Garrand posted:Okay someone explain it for those of us who don't know soccer The blue line corresponds to where the Cameroonian player's foot is placed. Because it's in front of the red line, corresponding to the second-to-last English player, the Cameroonian player is offside, and thus has committed a minor foul that should result in the stoppage of play. Cameroon had scored a few seconds after that pass, but all goals in major competitions are subject to review to ensure goals aren't allowed or disallowed due to the assistant referees erring on calling offside. It's like if a wide receiver caught a touchdown pass off a false start; the score would be immediately reversed. e: It's worth pointing out that VAR is really good at spotting offside offences as you either are or you aren't offside. Most criticism of VAR comes from referees making decisions on things such as violent conduct or handball after seeing the replay. TinTower has a new favorite as of 01:53 on Jun 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
TinTower posted:
I’m not familiar with football. Can someone explain this using tennis?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Arivia posted:What's up with that Cameroon player way in the corner? Or is that a ref? I didn't watch the game but it looks like a Cameroon player, but she was not involved in the play so ignored for that part.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
calandryll posted:I didn't watch the game but it looks like a Cameroon player, but she was not involved in the play so ignored for that part. She'd been involved in the previous attacking play and was putting pressure on the England goalkeeper clearing the ball from the area. She was moving back to midfield at the time the offside offence occurred.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
TinTower posted:She'd been involved in the previous attacking play and was putting pressure on the England goalkeeper clearing the ball from the area. She was moving back to midfield at the time the offside offence occurred. Ah, I didn't get a chance to see anything today so basing it off the image.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:I’m not familiar with football. Can someone explain this using tennis? It's like if the serving player aced the opponent off the serve, but video review found that the server's foot had crossed the line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 03:15
|
|
|
SpaceViking posted:It's like if the serving player aced the opponent off the serve, but video review found that the server's foot had crossed the line. I don't understand sports analogies. Can someone explain this with Bloodborne? I'll take a strained Dark Souls summeration in a pinch if I need to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
Zesty posted:Sure. But it's also insane that people are getting mad that the headline misled them into making a kneejerk reaction without reading the content. Don't we frequently make fun of people for that in this very thread? There is a slight difference between "this headline makes its case poorly, I won't read the article" and "this headline makes me angry; I will share and believe it without looking at the article, which makes unsourced claims or use sources which directly contradict the headline."
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
RareAcumen posted:I don't understand sports analogies. Can someone explain this with Bloodborne? I'll take a strained Dark Souls summeration in a pinch if I need to. Fiiiine. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1054115562769416192 Does it make sense now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
Katt posted:Fiiiine. I reflexively made a  face while reading this
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:33
|
|
|
Something Awful is Daikatana
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
snergle posted:yellow journalism is the default form of journalism. truthful news was only a short experiment. The fiction of journalistic objectivity has been incredibly toxic imo. But agree that the journalism where there was at least an attempt in most cases to fact check and get details right probably only extended (in the US) from 1954, when Joe McCarthy’s meltdown opened a door or two, to 1996, when Roger Ailes took over at Fox News. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Tell me more about the wet, sticky gender fluid mess. https://twitter.com/mrbenjaminlaw/status/1143012592798982144?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 05:57
|
|
|
T-man posted:Something Awful is Daikatana I can't post without my buddy superfly!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:11
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Tell me more about the wet, sticky gender fluid mess. Lyle ate poo poo all the way to a twitter ban, didn't he?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
AlbieQuirky posted:The fiction of journalistic objectivity has been incredibly toxic imo. Funnily enough, the idea of journalistic objectivity most likely also emerged to maximize ad revenue. Back in the early 19th century newspapers tended to be partisan political outlets with direct links to political parties. But they didn't make any money that way and relied entirely on subsidies. So once newspapers became a commercial good that wanted to turn a profit, they fairly quickly realized that having an overt partisan bias alienated half their audience. So they got rid of that and started branding themselves as neutral and objective and just reporting the facts instead of spinning them, so as not to alienate half their potential audience. And while they were at it they also became way more sensationalist and attention-grabbing so that they could maximize their readership numbers, which would then lead to advertisers paying higher rates to advertise with them, which led to higher profits. It's basically the exact same business model as the modern internet where the thing everyone is competing for is your attention and your engagement so that they can sell ads, just that back then it was being done for buying newspapers instead of clicking on tweets. In the US this was happening as long ago as the 1830s.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/GamerTakes/status/1143014738361815040?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:40
|
|
|
CAn it even be called a remake if Tifa doesn’t have her trademark HUGE TITS?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
They're still huge and also she has spats now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:52
|
|
|
Love that in the trailer you can clearly see the effort that went into finding a balance that doesn't make The Tits comically large but also doesn't alienate chuds. Little did Square know their take has already been decided
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:52
|
|
|
Volcott posted:They're still huge and also she has spats now. People complain about everything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 07:05
|
|
|
Yeah, her tits are still huge, they're just like in the range of human possibility, instead of like Skyrim mods gone horribly awry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 07:19
|
|
|
Aren't Student Loans like the biggest(or one of) asset the U.S Government has? lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 07:55
|
|
|
First they came for the vagina bones, and I did not speak out - because I had no idea what vagina bones were. Then they came for the Japanese voice acting, and I did not speak out - because I don't like reading subtitles. Then they came for the mini-game where you touch anime girls, and I did not speak out - because I'm not a pedophile. Then they came for Tifa's titties - AND I WAS loving OUTRAGED AND RECORDED A YOUTUBE VIDEO WHAT THE F
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 07:58
|
|
|
BoonyPC posted:Aren't Student Loans like the biggest(or one of) asset the U.S Government has? lol Money is mostly fictional when your operating at that level, so who the gently caress cares? Also probably not, almost all the profit from student loans goes to private banks. Also we've spent 2.4 trillion on invading Iraq for no reason whatsoever and we're still spending money on that, so we can repay all the student loans by just not invading Iran.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 07:59
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:This is entirely intentional and expect this to be the case even more often in the future. It is and I'm finding it infuriating. I kind of expect it from right learning media outlets, but increasingly I'm seeing left learning ones baiting right wingers with headlines that validate their views of the left.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 08:47
|
|
|
Midnight Voyager posted:I'm currently unemployed because my grandmother needs taking care of and we can't afford someone for that, so I'm doing it. Checkmate! If you're American, you can get paid for doing this via IHHS
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 08:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:37 |
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:It is and I'm finding it infuriating. I kind of expect it from right learning media outlets, but increasingly I'm seeing left learning ones baiting right wingers with headlines that validate their views of the left. It's the consequence of online publishing relying on social media. "Engagement" causes these platforms to circulate posts more (organically because people are consciously sharing it, and through feed algorithms automatically picking posts that seem popular to recirculate). And the easiest and best way to get a lot of that sweet sweet engagement is to write something very stupid so people reply to the post to call you stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 09:06
|
|
