Things You Notice When You Quit the News

Post by digler999 » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 11:20 PM UTC

blhack wrote: post #105

cyberferret wrote: post #70

I haven't had a TV in the house for nearly 8 years now, and don't miss it at all. The biggest problem to me, seems to be the 24 hour news cycle for things like wars, elections and the like. I was visiting friends during a couple of major air accidents in the past couple of years (The MH370 and MH17 incidents in particular), and was astounded at the propensity for news stations on ALL channels to fill every minute of…

>Not only that, I used to be a commercial pilot, and I could not believe the amount of disinformation and outright ridiculous theories being bandied about by so called 'reputable' news sources. This is true every time there is a news story on about anything that somebody around me is an expert on. It's always "what the hell are they talking about!?" I've seen this directly, too. I've been on the local news quite a fe…

Post by ldjb » Tue, Dec 13, 2016, 1:04 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #230

ldjb wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Items are nominated, discussed, and then a consensus is reached regarding whether to include them. There is information on the 'In the news' section at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news The page for nominating and discussing items is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidat... In case you hadn't heard of it before, Wikipedia also has a sister project called Wikinews: https:/…

Does Wikipedia source news from Wikinews?

Post by cmillard » Tue, Dec 13, 2016, 1:46 AM UTC

booleandilemma wrote: post #65

In Neal Stephenson's novel Anathem, there are different groups of intellectuals that have been cloistered from society, and they may only re-enter it for a short time every year, decade, century, or millennium, depending on what group they're in. Because of this, they only get summaries of the most important things that have happened, and they are left with plenty of time for scientific pursuits.

Post by secabeen » Tue, Dec 13, 2016, 2:05 AM UTC

Post by heartbreak » Tue, Dec 13, 2016, 5:12 AM UTC

rndgermandude wrote: post #327

leephillips wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greenwald's "excellent" piece is itself fake news. It deliberately misrepresents the reporting done by Kurt Eichenwald about the leaked emails. We know it's deliberate because he's distorted the story the same way in the past and it's been pointed out to him. Eichenwald did not claim that the leaked information was false, but showed, to a high degree of certainty, that Trump campaign staffers were working with Russia…

Eichenwald claims on live TV the email in question was "manipulated" by Russia. Just watch the video that Eichenwald himself embedded in his article (at 01:49). > There are two possibilities: One is that both the Russians and Donald Trump were tricked into believing of a manipulated email or the Russians manipulated it and Donald Trump fell for it Greenwald counters emails were not doctored/manipulated and that sayin…