They'll post something with a misleading headline and when you read the story it is nothing like the headline. 

Yahoo does this crap all the time for just about any story they post. They're not my go-to news source but I do look them over as well as MSN and BBC and more often than not they having extremely misleading headlines. Aggravates the mess out of me.

---

Amazing that he has any following. The guy was a FBI informant. Owes a ton of money in back taxes. Etc etc.

Why anyone would think he's credible is the perfect example of how common sense isn't common..it's now an oxymoron. Emphasis on the moron part.

Like my ex-husband and our commander-in-chief, he has plenty of charisma but absolutely no character. He tells people what they want to hear- what's right in their mind- and for reasons unknown to rational folks, they listen even when they know he's feeding them poison. People so often would rather be 'right' than happy. 

---

I think what he is saying is people post misleading headlines and news skews things how they want to view them and what will generate the most ratings. I'm constantly correcting people of Facebook. They'll post something with a misleading headline and when you read the story it is nothing like the headline. People don't even bother to dig for the truth. People will post things to fit their agendas. The news has a huge control on how this counter views the world. That is the reality of it. They control the narrative.

 

"They" control the narrative? That would be true if there were only "the media". Fact is there are a number of media sources. Find a few that you think are reliable and trustworthy and use them. It's not that hard.

 

As far as people on Facebook - what do you want me to say? People are stupid? Yes, they are and you or I can't do much about it. (And of course, sometimes stupid = doesn't agree with me.) If people don't even bother to dig for the truth you can't make them find it. That's a whole lot different than laying the blame on "the media", which is what the OP was trying to do.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Like my ex-husband and our commander-in-chief, he has plenty of charisma but absolutely no character. He tells people what they want to hear- what's right in their mind- and for reasons unknown to rational folks, they listen even when they know he's feeding them poison. People so often would rather be 'right' than happy. 

 

Wow - I guess in your world if someone disagrees with you politically it means he has "absolutely no character". If it's a different view it's only what people want to hear? If it's what you want to hear it's right and proper? And we wonder why politics has become so partisan?

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

"They" control the narrative? That would be true if there were only "the media". Fact is there are a number of media sources. Find a few that you think are reliable and trustworthy and use them. It's not that hard.


As far as people on Facebook - what do you want me to say? People are stupid? Yes, they are and you or I can't do much about it. (And of course, sometimes stupid = doesn't agree with me.) If people don't even bother to dig for the truth you can't make them find it. That's a whole lot different than laying the blame on "the media", which is what the OP was trying to do.

Huh I didn't mention the media? I was talking about the protest over a man that pulled a gun on an officer and the absurdity of it.

---

Huh I didn't mention the media? I was talking about the protest over a man that pulled a gun on an officer and the absurdity of it.

 

I'm sorry - I got it wrong about the responding to the OP (you). I was responding to The Eleventh Doctor's claim that it's all the media's fault.

 

You know better.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

I'm sorry - I got it wrong about the responding to the OP (you). I was responding to The Eleventh Doctor's claim that it's all the media's fault.

 

You know better.

 

that makes sense, thought maybe you saw something I didn't mean to imply.

---

Wow - I guess in your world if someone disagrees with you politically it means he has "absolutely no character". If it's a different view it's only what people want to hear? If it's what you want to hear it's right and proper? And we wonder why politics has become so partisan?

No, there's a big distinction between a difference of opinion and full on being lied to or stretching the truth to fit what you want people to believe.

 

It's less than 24 hours until 2015 and people are STILL waving the race flag and it looks like we're actually devolving from where we were a year ago. That's thanks to Sharpton and his buddies, to include the President, who fan the flames by making grand speeches (Sharpton) or passive aggressive comments (Obama) that do not advance race relations at all. Not to mention Eric Holder who is not innocent in all of this.

 

And the black community does itself no favors by rioting and looting. It makes folks who actually agree with why they're angry not even care because they make themselves look like uncontrollable animals who care about nothing but hate and discontent and destruction.

---

No, there's a big distinction between a difference of opinion and full on being lied to or stretching the truth to fit what you want people to believe.

 

It's less than 24 hours until 2015 and people are STILL waving the race flag and it looks like we're actually devolving from where we were a year ago. That's thanks to Sharpton and his buddies, to include the President, who fan the flames by making grand speeches (Sharpton) or passive aggressive comments (Obama) that do not advance race relations at all. Not to mention Eric Holder who is not innocent in all of this.

 

And the black community does itself no favors by rioting and looting. It makes folks who actually agree with why they're angry not even care because they make themselves look like uncontrollable animals who care about nothing but hate and discontent and destruction.

 

Passive aggressive statements by Obama? LOL. What does that even mean? I think you've been watching too much Dr. Phil.

 

I'll go with Barack Obama's take on the black experience over most of the people who post here.

 

And do you call groups of white rioters "looking like uncontrollable animals"? Just asking.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Passive aggressive statements by Obama? LOL. What does that even mean? I think you've been watching too much Dr. Phil.

 

I'll go with Barack Obama's take on the black experience over most of the people who post here.

 

And do you call groups of white rioters "looking like uncontrollable animals"? Just asking.

 

While I know this wasn't address to me, I certainly call them animals. 

 

As for Obama's "black experience", I'd hardly consider his growing up in a liberal paradise in Hawaii with white grand parents and then having the privilege of attending two of the world's finest Universities as a "black experience". Truthfully, he has no idea what it's like to be the black man living in a lower income community. More specifically, the black man that you appear to imply.

 

Having said all that, his recent comments tend to be more supportive of police. However, his actions consistently support a less-than-favorable opinion. When he advertises how he will send investigators to investigate specific police departments after a white officer shoots a black person, then ignores all of the opposite situations, inference would suggest that he has an agenda. Especially when there's no evidence to suggest police corruption in those departments. Whether or not that is an intentional effort is unclear, but his actions lead people to belief that he has an ulterior motive.

---

Common sense went out the window a long time ago

---

"They" control the narrative? That would be true if there were only "the media". Fact is there are a number of media sources. Find a few that you think are reliable and trustworthy and use them. It's not that hard.

 

As far as people on Facebook - what do you want me to say? People are stupid? Yes, they are and you or I can't do much about it. (And of course, sometimes stupid = doesn't agree with me.) If people don't even bother to dig for the truth you can't make them find it. That's a whole lot different than laying the blame on "the media", which is what the OP was trying to do.

 

In many ways, yes, they do, at least to a certain extent.  In the bold, you are missing the point.  The media has a huge influence on what is being discussed and how people view that discussion.  That is just the reality of it.  Fact is most don't fact check.  

 

If the media has huge influence on the narrative and shapes views, then they have a lot of power.  I think the media has a share of the blame absolutely.  Anytime something is being pushed by the media I always question it.  Most don't.

---

Passive aggressive statements by Obama? LOL. What does that even mean? I think you've been watching too much Dr. Phil.

 

I'll go with Barack Obama's take on the black experience over most of the people who post here.

 

And do you call groups of white rioters "looking like uncontrollable animals"? Just asking.

JagsNGeorgia's reply is representative of how I feel about it all.

---

In many ways, yes, they do, at least to a certain extent.  In the bold, you are missing the point.  The media has a huge influence on what is being discussed and how people view that discussion.  That is just the reality of it.  Fact is most don't fact check.  

 

If the media has huge influence on the narrative and shapes views, then they have a lot of power.  I think the media has a share of the blame absolutely.  Anytime something is being pushed by the media I always question it.  Most don't.

 

The media has always had a huge influence on what is discussed and what we think is an important issue.   For example, the Hearst newspaper chain basically created the Spanish American War.   To go back even further, what about Thomas Paine in the American Revolution? 

 

The only new thing about it is that there are so many choices now, so the media is fractured and has a lot less power over the narrative than it used to.  In fact, now, you can basically choose your own version of reality.  For example, think of how one portion of the media sold some of us on the idea that Romney was going to win the last election.       

 

So, "the media" is now far less monolithic than it used to be.   It can have a huge influence, but only after you choose which media outlets you believe.   Tea Party News Network, Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, Christian Broadcasting Network, Fox News, CBS News, MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, New York Times.   Some of them have high journalistic ideals, some of them chase ratings, and some of them push an agenda.

 

Really, there isn't any "the media" that is pushing one specific agenda.  

---