Author Topic: Misleading or false claims by the media  (Read 709 times)

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #50 on: January 08, 2019, 01:24:05 PM »
Quote
Fen, her intent could not be plainer.

Anyone having political bias will come to the conclusion that the intent of someone in opposition could not be plainer.
This is a error I see a lot of us, including myself making and we need to be more careful.

Listening and watching the interview the intent behind her quote on facts and morals does not, to me anyway, point to a intent that people should let facts slide.
"It's (facts) absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, "Okay, this was clumsy."

I haven't been paying much attention to her so don't know if she has a habit of playing fast and lose with facts. What I saw was a excited idealist who very much believes in what she stand for.
I found her authentic if naive and expect the system will devour her.

I find the furious and concern over her understanding and use of facts interesting. For me their is a 'clear intent' to ignore the understanding and use of facts from the commander and chief. A clear intent of his supporters to look the other way (or a unconscious shadow projection) but that would be mind reading :)

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #51 on: January 08, 2019, 01:30:25 PM »
Quote
"Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family."

That's Trumpian hyperbole, and it got her a pants on fire from politifact.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #52 on: January 08, 2019, 01:41:45 PM »
RL, you quoted her actual statements:

Quote
If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they're missing the forest for the trees. I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

"She is saying she is good people so it should be let slide when she's grossly wrong because her larger point is correct. "

Quote
It's absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, "Okay, this was clumsy." and then I restate what my point was. But it's— it's not the same thing as— as the president lying about immigrants. It's not the same thing, at all.

" She is saying the "other side" is bad people and that's where this kind of fact checking should be focused."

I don't get why anyone's trying to explain this away.  Again, she could not be plainer with her statements about what it means to be "morally right." 

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #53 on: January 08, 2019, 02:07:51 PM »
Quote
I don't get why anyone's trying to explain this away.

 ;D I don't get why anyone tries to explain away Trumps use of facts.  To me Trumps intention could not be plainer however I cannot state as fact that the intention I suspect he has is his intention. Only Trump could know that... and I suspected even he is not sure. 

Quote
Again, she could not be plainer with her statements about what it means to be "morally right."
What I got from her interview was that she believe her goals are the ones we should be morally aiming at and that she isn't overly concerned with how we pay for them. That does not mean she intended to promote morality trumps facts.

By all means jump on her about her view of reality and idealistic goals. This focus on her failure to get the facts right is just hypocrisy or worse unconscious shadow projection. At least she indicated that she intends to do better when she is clumsy with the facts.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #54 on: January 08, 2019, 02:32:26 PM »
What I find confusing is explaining away her position on her misuse of facts not mattering because she's morally right.  That has nothing to do with the errors itself, which are not as big a deal to me.

I really only jump in on the Trump "errors" or "lies" where I think the interpretation of them is at least as misleading as the claim in the first place.  I don't see that with Ocasio-Cortez's statements, everyone knows she was wrong and no one seems to be attributing to any secret dark motives.  There's really nothing to "defend" on them, but the idea that her errors don't matter because her cause in just is truly offensive.

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #55 on: January 08, 2019, 03:01:34 PM »
Quote
What I find confusing is explaining away her position on her misuse of facts not mattering because she's morally right

That is where we disagree. I don't think that is what she "said" or intended to say.
You are assuming you her intent is clear because that is how you see it. Fair enough, That does not however mean your speculation is a fact or that everyone will see it as you do. 

If Trump had said what she said I suspect you would defending it.  I have heard the argument from many of his supporters that what matters isn't the facts but what he's doing. How is that different from your confusion of why people are explaining away her position.

Welcome to the confusion
« Last Edit: January 08, 2019, 03:07:06 PM by rightleft22 »

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #56 on: January 14, 2019, 03:47:36 PM »
Wasn't sure what thread to post this in, but I figured the one about false or misleading media reports was as good as any:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/13/politics/white-house-iran-airstrikes-national-security-council/index.html

Quote
The White House's National Security Council asked the Pentagon last year for plans for launching a military attack against Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported early Sunday, citing current and former US officials.

The request from the council, which is led by national security adviser John Bolton, came after an attack in September on the US Embassy in Baghdad by a militant group aligned with Iran, according to the Journal.

[...]

The request was met with concern by both the Pentagon and the State Department, according to the Journal, with one former administration official telling the paper that people were "shocked" by the request.

[...]

Although the Pentagon obeyed the request by the council, the Journal reported, it is unknown whether or not the plans for striking Iran were ever fully developed or even provided to the White House. The Journal also said that it is unknown whether President Donald Trump had knowledge of the request.

Can anyone tell me how it's legal for any of the following to occur:

1) For people at the Pentagon to leak to the media the nature of stategic planning being made between them and the White House?
2) For this to be released through all media channels publicly, despite the fact that it's highly threatening and inflammatory towards Iran in particular?
3) And for a media circus to be made about a plan that was never actually carried out but appears to have just been a theoretical option?

As I understand it the military spends a considerable amount of time working out theoretical military plans based around just about every conceivable contingency. At any given time there are probably hundreds of established plans of attack sitting around focused around any possible foe they could imagine, obviously including Iran. So I'd like to know how it's anything other than fake news to suggest that being asked to create an attack plan against Iran is (a) irregular, and (b) something to blast out in public, and (c) even questionable. How can it be questionable to create lines of attack to be used if needed?

So you tell me: is this pure fake news, in that this is being paraded around as if it's something fantastically marvelous?

And I'm even more concerned about the idea that Pentagon officials will just tell media organizations about covert strategic requests from the White House. Isn't that treason?

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #57 on: January 14, 2019, 04:02:20 PM »
There's a difference between having plans on hand so a surprise conflict isn't starting from scratch and being told to draw up plans in response to an "act of war." Though I don't think article properly supports its conclusion that the request was "shocking" or particularly noteworthy.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #58 on: January 14, 2019, 04:14:31 PM »
There's a difference between having plans on hand so a surprise conflict isn't starting from scratch and being told to draw up plans in response to an "act of war." Though I don't think article properly supports its conclusion that the request was "shocking" or particularly noteworthy.

The usual procedure as I understand is to have ready battle plans for many contingencies, and that this isn't just to avoid surprise but to judge how effectively various problems could theoretically be dealt with. I'm sure that the mere existence of some of these actually helps with policy because knowing how difficult or perhaps easy some of them would be to execute might inform the White House about whether that entire scenario should be avoided or courted. In this case if a plan was drafted in response to an act of war, how is that different than any of the other other battle plans, other than the fact that it was a particular scenario they didn't already have a plan lying around for?

It sounds to me not just that it's not news, but that it's deliberately being manufactured into being inflammatory for some reason.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #59 on: January 14, 2019, 04:22:57 PM »
Because the "act of war" bit implies that it's intended to be used rather than just be used to inform policy. Though all we seem to have is that someone said people were shocked. This article is certainly playing up the significance of whatever happened but it could just be click bait rather than to inflame anything.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #60 on: January 14, 2019, 04:29:58 PM »
Because the "act of war" bit implies that it's intended to be used rather than just be used to inform policy.

Afaik all of these theoretical plans are intended to be used, in the event that the contingency arises.

Quote
Though all we seem to have is that someone said people were shocked. This article is certainly playing up the significance of whatever happened but it could just be click bait rather than to inflame anything.

Yeah. I'm almost less concerned with the clickbait aspect to it as compared with the fact that this would get told to the media in the first place.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #61 on: January 14, 2019, 04:45:32 PM »
Or...  This leak was intentional to ratchet up the threat to Iran to negotiate from a position of weakness.  Or so a hawk would see it. 

A controlled and well timed leak (no clue if this qualifies) can be every bit as potent a tool as actual diplomatic outreach or overt threat. 

Sets you up for good cop bad cop, military overreach, anti-whistleblower measures and countless other things. 

OR... it's just more incompetence and backstabbing from a government in turmoil. 

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #62 on: January 14, 2019, 05:47:26 PM »
Quote
For people at the Pentagon to leak to the media the nature of strategic planning being made between them and the White House

If the plan was classified I would think it was illegal to leak it. That said leaking it could be a strategic move to let Iran know the US is "thinking about them"

I'm not paying attention to the story however anyone is attempting to spin the idea that asking for such a plan was improper won't come off as credible.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #63 on: January 14, 2019, 05:54:00 PM »
It's certainly plausible that things can be released to have a deliberate effect. But I don't recollect ever hearing (since I've been paying attention) of reports before of Pentagon military planning being leaked to have an effect on a foreign power. It would seem like a weird thing to begin doing now, although maybe under the Trump admin we should expect weird.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #64 on: January 14, 2019, 06:05:04 PM »
Depends also upon how exaggerated the whole narrative of "Trump is impossible to advise and won't listen to anyone".  If there's any truth to it, leaks seem more plausible; as does sabotage.  (Is it still sabotage when you are trying to stop a saboteur?)

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #65 on: January 15, 2019, 10:45:18 AM »
So far the only explanation proffered is that the leak was a result of the White House itself allowing it to be released in order to put Iran in its place or something. That's an extremely specific scenerio, and on the balance it doesn't seem to be the most likely explanation, although certainly it's possible. But putting that scenario aside for a moment, does it not seem like the alternative scenario (that it was leaked to the media without authorization) seem outright treasonous? Reasons for such a leak could be to embarass the White House, or else possibly to undermine a non-aggressive policy towards Iran by forcing the issue, so that warhawks could make provoking moves towards Iran on their own even despite the White House's policy. These are both completely plausible as I see it, and I don't know how to evaluate such moves other than in dire terms.

Or am I missing something?

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #66 on: January 15, 2019, 10:57:14 AM »
So far the only explanation proffered is that the leak was a result of the White House itself allowing it to be released in order to put Iran in its place or something. That's an extremely specific scenerio, and on the balance it doesn't seem to be the most likely explanation, although certainly it's possible. But putting that scenario aside for a moment, does it not seem like the alternative scenario (that it was leaked to the media without authorization) seem outright treasonous? Reasons for such a leak could be to embarass the White House, or else possibly to undermine a non-aggressive policy towards Iran by forcing the issue, so that warhawks could make provoking moves towards Iran on their own even despite the White House's policy. These are both completely plausible as I see it, and I don't know how to evaluate such moves other than in dire terms.

Or am I missing something?

You had asked "how would this be legal" and that was the only way. If we consider the question, "why was this done?" That comes under a different heading.

It is not treason to expose something that you think is harmful to the country. It wasn't for Snowden, it wasn't for the Pentagon Papers, and it might not be here. If the leak were an attempt to alert the public that the administration is trying to pull a Gulf of Tonkin Resolution with Iran, it could be a selfless patriotic act that prevents a war with Iran.

We can rehash what treason is, and is not.

Quote
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere,

Releasing this information would not appear to aid Iran particularly much. They didn't release any specifics to the plan, or there's a much stronger case for treason. Not to say it isn't illegal, I suspect it is.

As for using it to influence public policy, I think it is far more likely that it was intended to reign in aggression toward Iran and to make people suspicious about any Administration "act of war" claims they might make.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #67 on: January 15, 2019, 11:16:36 AM »
As for using it to influence public policy, I think it is far more likely that it was intended to reign in aggression toward Iran and to make people suspicious about any Administration "act of war" claims they might make.

Interesting idea!

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #68 on: January 15, 2019, 01:55:10 PM »
You had asked "how would this be legal"

If the document was classified it might not be treason to release it however it would be Illegal... I think or at least someone should have there security clearance revoked and or fired. 

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #69 on: January 15, 2019, 03:07:36 PM »
You had asked "how would this be legal"

If the document was classified it might not be treason to release it however it would be Illegal... I think or at least someone should have there security clearance revoked and or fired.

I'm not saying I know anything for sure, just really asking questions. But wouldn't it be considered as treason to disclose confidential attack details to the nation targeted by those plans?

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #70 on: January 15, 2019, 03:55:41 PM »
Quote
But wouldn't it be considered as treason to disclose confidential attack details to the nation targeted by those plans?

Even Snowden's crime isn't treason, as I understand it. Take a look at the language. But nobody released the document anyway, they just described its existence.

Under the statute, an enemy is an organization with which the US is in a declared or open war. So even the Navy spy, Walker, didn't qualify despite giving up lots of military secrets.

A brief search ran me across the following weirdness:

Quote
During the Civil War, Lewis’ paper noted, a professional gambler named William Mumford who lived in New Orleans was the only person formally convicted of treason. Mumford, angered by the replacement of the Confederate flag with an American one at the city’s US Mint building following the Navy’s capture of the state, scaled a flagpole and removed the flag.

“For this action, he was tried by military tribunal on the grounds of treason,” the paper noted. “His overt act was found to be the desecration of the American flag, and since the United States contended the southern states were still a part of the Union, Mumford was a U.S. citizen who owed allegiance to the country.”

Mumford was executed by hanging on June 7, 1862 from the same scaffolding at the Mint building where he’d torn down the flag.

That seems a bit harsh.

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #71 on: January 15, 2019, 04:49:33 PM »
Quote
I'm not saying I know anything for sure, just really asking questions. But wouldn't it be considered as treason to disclose confidential attack details to the nation targeted by those plans?

Personally I would think so

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #72 on: January 15, 2019, 07:33:18 PM »
Quote
But wouldn't it be considered as treason to disclose confidential attack details to the nation targeted by those plans?

Even Snowden's crime isn't treason, as I understand it.

Right, but what he released was information about what he saw as illegal activity by the government towards its own people. Unless the U.S. population is a potential enemy of the state then I don't see how it's analogous to this situation. What I'm asking about is openly telling Iran (since they watch American news) that the government was formulating aggressive plans against them. I mean, let's say for instance the White House was hypothetically planning a surprise first strike against Iran; and now that the news was leaked that battle plans were being drawn, Iran might tighten up their security. Doesn't that sound like aiding a potential enemy? Now, the fact that was hasn't been declared may be a fine point to mention, but at the same time there are no "wars" these days, only police actions.

Quote
Take a look at the language. But nobody released the document anyway, they just described its existence.

That's what it sounds like, yeah. I guess if someone had literally faxed the plan to Tehran then that would be espionage, versus leaking sensitive info to the press which is certainly not espionage but still sounds whack to me. And btw I'll just toss in that I'm in no way pleased about the idea of taunting Iran so I'm not sure how to evaluate the results of this leak, regardless of its intent. But just on the face of it, when I read about this in the news my reaction was basically "wtf?"

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #73 on: January 15, 2019, 09:19:36 PM »
Honorable mention should probably go to NBC News, and presumably some other outlets with regards to the hearing for the next AG when questioned about the Mueller Investigation: "I've known Mueller for over 30 years... I don't believe he would take part in a 'witch hunt'"

Headline: AG Nominee "Mueller Probe is not a witch hunt."  ::)

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #74 on: January 15, 2019, 09:33:54 PM »
Various headlines on the matter, CNBC is about as accurate as I could imagine:

Trump AG pick Barr: Mueller would not be 'involved in a witch hunt'

NBC current headline is:

William Barr: 'Vitally important' for Mueller to complete Russia probe

NY Post bends it harder, implying a stronger conclusion.

William Barr says Mueller’s probe is not a ‘witch hunt’

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #75 on: January 15, 2019, 10:27:23 PM »
NBC current headline is:

William Barr: 'Vitally important' for Mueller to complete Russia probe

NY Post bends it harder, implying a stronger conclusion.

William Barr says Mueller’s probe is not a ‘witch hunt’

NBC's evening news ran with the NY Post version, and probably repeated the proclamation about half a dozen different times in the span of about 2 1/2 minutes.  ::)

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #76 on: January 18, 2019, 05:19:22 PM »
Here's one I'm conflicted on, the video report is solid, the text that accompanies it is a bit different.

Personal "favorite" part of it has to be after 1:48 mark, where he goes into describing how the border wall in the area is ineffective and how it is being defeated, and concludes with(not in text of the report):
https://abcnews.go.com/beta-story-container/US/largest-single-group-migrants-tunnels-border-wall-arizona/story?id=60462672
Quote
What the Border Patrol needs most is a barrier system, one that includes sensors in the ground, and better camera systems to detect asylum seekers as they come through.

How exactly do you build a barrier system without including barriers, such as, say, a wall?

I don't think the "build the wall" crowd ever said the wall was the be-all and end all for border security. Agents weren't going to be reassigned after it was built. The wall was always "step 1" of a more comprehensive effort to secure the border.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #77 on: January 18, 2019, 05:22:52 PM »
Skynet controlled hunter killer drones?

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Misleading or false claims by the media
« Reply #78 on: January 18, 2019, 05:33:07 PM »
Quote
What the Border Patrol needs most is a barrier system, one that includes sensors in the ground, and better camera systems to detect asylum seekers as they come through.

How exactly do you build a barrier system without including barriers, such as, say, a wall?

Ground sensors and cameras - are referred to as barrier systems and don't include physical walls - they are also called "virtual barriers" or "virtual fences".

Yes it is confusing terminology.