I disagree with what they do and don’t present, and with the emphasis they place on different things.
To me, it’s relevant that Trump wants to end democracy in the United States and weaponize federal law enforcement against his enemies, and that he reacts with approval when his supporters want to kill his enemies. To me, if I ran a news organization, any coverage of the presidential race would be informed in some way by that context. I definitely wouldn’t inflate a maybe-has-some-legitimacy story about (this week) Biden’s age (when next week it’ll be something else) in the way that you and CNN like to do.
I think CNN, and you, are basically running stories about how Hindenburg is old and out of touch with today’s youth who want vigor and change in their politics, and how Hitler’s going to clean him up in the general election, and different mistakes that his opponents have made in the past. In that sense, yes, I would disagree with what they’re reporting.
This type of “oh I guess you think X should be banned” strawman reaction to any criticism of a news outlet is, itself, anti-free-speech. Of course I can say CNN often reports harmful half-truths and explain what I mean by that. Are you suggesting I shouldn’t say that? Is there a reason you’re strawmanning that into me somehow saying they should be banned?
So you don’t disagree with what they’re reporting? Notice I’m simply posting articles from them 99% of the time.
I disagree with what they do and don’t present, and with the emphasis they place on different things.
To me, it’s relevant that Trump wants to end democracy in the United States and weaponize federal law enforcement against his enemies, and that he reacts with approval when his supporters want to kill his enemies. To me, if I ran a news organization, any coverage of the presidential race would be informed in some way by that context. I definitely wouldn’t inflate a maybe-has-some-legitimacy story about (this week) Biden’s age (when next week it’ll be something else) in the way that you and CNN like to do.
I think CNN, and you, are basically running stories about how Hindenburg is old and out of touch with today’s youth who want vigor and change in their politics, and how Hitler’s going to clean him up in the general election, and different mistakes that his opponents have made in the past. In that sense, yes, I would disagree with what they’re reporting.
Should we move CNN to the banned news source list like Fox News now? If they’re going to criticize the sitting president I mean…
This type of “oh I guess you think X should be banned” strawman reaction to any criticism of a news outlet is, itself, anti-free-speech. Of course I can say CNN often reports harmful half-truths and explain what I mean by that. Are you suggesting I shouldn’t say that? Is there a reason you’re strawmanning that into me somehow saying they should be banned?