Comey appeared to be blackmailing Trump???

Sparagmos said:

In this case I’m pretty sure the media who published it knew that they were taking he quote completely out of context. They had to listen to the interview to extract the quote.

Click to expand...

grasping the after wind said:

In many cases that can be found. Cherry picking has become an epidemic in the media. But again that is not fact checking that is spin checking or propaganda checking. Those things can be done easily enough if one simply pays attention and is skeptical of the author no matter who the author is. In those cases the facts are not at issue but the facts may have been cherry picked or their meaning misrepresented. Checking actual facts is much more difficult. If someone says X did Y on such and such a day and none else says that happened then how does one check that ? I suggest we just refuse to believe it until it is verified by someone other than the original person. The same person being quoted in multiple sources is not a verification in any sense of the term.

Click to expand...

Sparagmos said:

I’m not aware that ANYONE reported the pee tape as fact. It was simply reported that there was a dossier that made that claim, which is a fact. The news was that someone was making the crazy allegation, not that it happened. If you go back and read the dossier, you will see that it is full of stuff that we now know is true. The pee tape part is completely unfounded but a bunch of other stuff in the dossier was actually correct. Yet people still refer to the “fake dossier.”

Click to expand...

grasping the after wind said:

AFAIK there is no legal requirement to provide sources. checking for internal contradictions is helpful in spotting headline spin but it isn't actual fact checking.
To check whether something is a fact one needs first hand information not a link to another source that has the same initial source ( usually the source first quoted by NYT or WAPO as many modern journalists, not employed by those two and a slight few more organizations, seem to be more like scribes than journalists just reiterating what they saw elsewhere and not having any first hand knowledge of their own.

How does the average citizen go out and check if Trump hired people to pee on a bed in Russia, never mind the profession those urinators were supposed to be engaged in? The best fact check is to dismiss out of hand any and all claims that seem completely ridiculous and doubt all that seem possible or likely until they have been completely verified by independent sources. The problems are that journalists no longer seem to think that it is good practice to report things only if they can be verified and that finding a real independent source is almost impossible as there are so many claiming to be that which are not. So, if someone says something many claiming to be journalists and being paid as if they were journalists will report that as if that is news rather than attempting to find out if what the person said is true before w quoting them. "An anonymous source says that Trump hired ……." . Then the article will opine on how this will affect things like the price of corn or the minimum wage or Democrat hopes for impeachment etc. with the words "If the source is correct then...." . By the time one finishes the whole article the author is perhaps hoping that no one has noticed the flimsy, ethereal nature of the "evidence" which was the basis for the whole article's opinionated thrust. Everyone who really wants to now can feel completely justified in believing that Trump is a hirer of bed wetters and therefore the worst person in the history of mankind.

Click to expand...

grasping the after wind said:

Did I say that it was reported as a fact? No, I said they reported it as that someone said it was a fact. That's the way they can pretend to be reporting rather than engaging in political gossip ei with the intention of furthering their political allies. "The source said it happened we just reported what was said we never said the source was correct." They didn't say the source was unreliable and from paid for opposition research either. The dossier is not fake it exists what is in it however is pretty much of no value. If there is anything correct in it that would lead one to feel not only justified but required to surveil private citizens in order to derail a Presidential campaign please let me know what that would be.

Click to expand...

Mountainmanbob said:

FBI was Concerned Comey Appeared to be Blackmailing Trump, Official Claims

Click to expand...

Sparagmos said:

Yup, I agree. But a news organization claiming someone said something is not the same as claiming that what the person said is true, yet Trump and others will call that fake news.

Click to expand...

JacobKStarkey said:

That such a dossier reported the pee incident is a fact.

The pee incident is, in fact, not a fact. Yet.

Click to expand...

grasping the after wind said:

"Scientists say Earth is flat "

Click to expand...

grasping the after wind said:

Reporting what one individual said about something without even attempting to verify or debunk that person's statement and with no independent verification sought is fake news. Headline "China will cave in trade negotiations.". followed by a body of the article that quotes Trump saying that and speculates on what China caving in negotiation would result in. Fake News. I do not buy the media's rationalization that they are only reporting what someone said and by not yelling" WE ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE THAT WHAT THIS PERSON IS SAYING IS THE GOD'S HONEST TRUTH!!!" . they are 100% justified in spreading unverified gossip. That is exactly what is being engaged in by many media sources. It is the equivalent of the person that has a grudge against a neighbor who hears a rumor about that neighbor having cheated on their spouse and spreads it to everyone that has ears saying " I have it on good authority from someone , I can't say who, that X is unfaithful to Y" and when it is proven to be false, claims total innocence of malevolent intent and says " I never said the rumor was true only that a person close to the situation said it was so ." .



It is a fact that someone said Obama was born in Kenya.
It is a fact that someone said the earth is flat.
It is a fact that someone said Joe Biden is a sexual predator.
Should headlines be written in the following way?
"Source close to White House says Obama born in Kenya."
"Scientists say Earth is flat "
" Biden a sexual predator according to former associate."

Click to expand...