CNN analyst: The Charlottesville lie
- Thread starter tlwwake
- Start date
***Waits for @Toonsback4morwinning and/or @Syskatine to shame Prague and ignore a factual video...
3... 2... 1....
3... 2... 1....
"Did President Trump call neo-Nazis “very fine people” following the Charlottesville riots of August 2017?"
No.
No.
It would seem you’re worried about the strength of your own source and simply projecting as a defense mechanism ***shrugs shoulders
You have more in common with the shooters than anybody right leaning or center on this board. ***nods head****
Not factual. Pretzel logic to support a narrative.
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/26/18517980/trump-unite-the-right-racism-defense-charlottesville
Yeah, I know "LOL, Vox". To which I say, "LOL, PragerU."
You won't get that from me. Vox has some good journalism... I read them from time to time so I'll check this. Thank you, Bj.
The clue here is that Steve Cortez does not actually show you the video of the news conference, so you can listen and make you own decision, he is telling you what your decision should be. I am not going to tell you what to believe, all I will say is go watch the news conference again, it is pretty obvious
Yes, it’s obvious that he condemns nazis and white supremacy in the transcript and video.
Here is the LA Times transcript:
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-charlottesville-transcript-20170815-story.html
And it doesnt take hunting for "clues" to read plain English.
Nor does it take a superior intellect to watch the clip (there are, what, hundreds of it online) and follow the broader context like a non-emotional person seeking the truth.
Tripodi wrote that "content creators like PragerU are not only exploiting the practices of scriptural inference, but also relying on search engine optimization and suggested content to elevate their messaging" and that PragerU's content "allows for those who identify as mainline conservatives to gain easy access to white supremacist logic."[20]
I mean it’s silly that this stuff gets spun this way. It makes the media look even more biased than they are.
I’m not a fan of how President Trump speaks a lot of the time but when the media creates a narrative that is at minimum misleading, they continue wearing a name badge that reads Fake News.
Been can I ask what you do for a living? Just curious. SEO, key words, targeting of content via social platforms is vital for any piece of content on the internet to reach an audience. If PragerU or any content provider was not attempting to target a certain audience they would not be getting views.
PragerU's content "allows for those who identify as mainline conservatives to gain easy access to white supremacist logic."[20]
I am a veterinarian.
"White supremicist logic" LOL
So in other words, you know what those with an agenda have told you.
You're a smart guy, look into it yourself and form an opinion.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...law_center_vs_prager_university__137305.html#!
Prager U has nothing to do with how Google (and YouTube) algorithmically connects videos.
That you don't think these kinds of accusations through is below your intellectual capacity.
The accusation from Tripoldi indicates she is either completely ignorant on how the internet actually works or that she just wanted to hammer home a liberal agenda to discredit an ideological adversary.
The irony of course being that Google and youtube have gone WAY out of their way to discredit and limit access to PragerU content due to ideological differences. Pretty frightening censorship.
So I’m going to be completely real with you. As a marketer, content creator, and one who makes data driven decisions I can say that study you provided is full of bias and should be labeled as opinion instead.
1) Her evidence is observations without provided transcripts of interviews, samples of data, and doesn’t display any knowledge on backend algorithms on the platforms in which they are pushed.
2) Google with all their biases is a business and while creative use of words, placement of content, and use of other creators to push a message, they have the ultimate authority to place content and information in a certain order on their search engine. You can get around that for the most part if you throw money at them, it’s sad, but true
3) She frequently ties Jewish men and Gay conservatives to pushing alt-right content without concrete examples
Her is a question that she fails to ask out the outset of her “study” that should absolutely be included, what is white supremacist logic and content?
Define what that is and instead of looking for evidence that just supports your argument, gather all evidence. You lose all credibility on a study without defining first what you seek and collect data to see if your hypothesis is confirmed.
Fvck Vox. Are you kidding me? Seriously, never ever bitch about my sources again. Watch the clip yourself. He absolutely condemned white supremacists and the very fine people was in reference to people who didn't want statues torn down - not nazis. To quote you, JFC.
Vox's whole argument appears to be that there were only two types of people who showed up Nazi's or people protesting against Nazi's so Trump had to be defending Nazi's.
Now that is pretzel logic.
