U.S. Has Killed al-Baghadi *also killed ISIS spokesperson today* (1 Viewer)

[BobE]

 

[LA - L.A.]

Ward you are trying hard, but if you can’t see the biases in the article you posted, I’m not sure you will ever see it. Maybe you just picked a bad article to make your point. I hate for this to be your sharpiegate (I’m joking with you don’t get upset)

And be honest, you didn’t even realize the comment about the impeachment would be seen as biased and thought this article was a good example of unbiased coverage. It’s ok to admit it.

This reminds me of the conversation I had earlier where people could not detect that the NY Times article on Tulsi was a smear.

When you reach that point there is really nothing left to do but recognize that there is nothing you can say that will help them view it the way you do. I think the bias is extremely easy to see, others, with a different worldview, don't see it. Each of us thinks it is because of the other's bias.

How do the two of you go about seeing through your own personal biases when making judgements about the biases of others?

 

[Intensesaint]

Do the two of you think your that your perceptions and impression are biased free?

They are not trying to claim they are not biased, but they are talking about NEWS agencies who really should not be biased, especially when they claim to have no bias.

They were talking about the the news agencies, and you flipped the question to them personally. They are taking about issues, and you are trying to talk about them as people. You may want to refer to Eleanor Roosevelt.

 

[Beach Friends]

How do the two of you go about seeing through your own personal biases when making judgements about the biases of others?

The first step is recognizing one's own biases. If you can't do that, it may be difficult for some people.

In any event, sometimes it is not so hard. For example, in the article we are discussing the writer mentioned "impeachment" without stating why that was relevant to the story.

Objectively, that's a red flag.

 

[LA - L.A.]

They are not trying to claim they are not biased, but they are talking about NEWS agencies who really should not be biased, especially when they claim to have no bias.

They were talking about the the news agencies, and you flipped the question to them personally. They are taking about issues, and you are trying to talk about them as people. You may want to refer to Eleanor Roosevelt.

I edited my post when I realized I missed that they both acknowledged they see things through their own personal biases.

I edited my post to ask the next question. Both of my questions are relevant questions to explore when anyone is accusing anyone else, including news agencies, of being biased.

I'm not talking about them as people in general, I specifically asking them about their own biases in a discussion about biases.

I have no idea what you are referring to in regards to Elanor Roosevelt.

 

[LA - L.A.]

The first step is recognizing one's own biases.

What's the next step you take?

 

[Beach Friends]

What's the next step you take?

One step at a time. Are you ready to acknowledge your own biases?

 

[LA - L.A.]

One step at a time. Are you ready to acknowledge your own biases?

Yes.

So, what's the next step?

 

[Beach Friends]

Yes.

So, what's the next step?

Excellent!

Next, I will need you to go through the big five psychological personality traits and do a very honest self evaluation. If you don't want to post them publicly, you can send them to me via PM.

Oh, if you are serious about this I need you to address me as Sensei and from here on out, no questions!

Seriously, just do like everybody else - recognize your own biases and do the best you can.

Good luck, Danielson.

 

[LA - L.A.]

How do the two of you go about seeing through your own personal biases when making judgements about the biases of others?

The first step is recognizing one's own biases.

What's the next step you take?

One step at a time. Are you ready to acknowledge your own biases?

Yes. So, what's the next step?

...recognize your own biases and do the best you can.

Just recognizing one's own biases doesn't make one able to see through (past, around or beyond) their own biases. You've acknowledged that recognition of one's own biases is only the first step.

What's the next step after recognizing one's own biases?

 

[Lazybones]

How do the two of you go about seeing through your own personal biases when making judgements about the biases of others?

I am not a news media outlet homie.

 

[Lazybones]

What young lady?

On NPR from when Osama was killed? Well, what show?

Otherwise, there wasn't a woman on 1A. At least not on the 12 minutes they posted today.

The young lady who was on after the trump speech. Sorry, I assumed you found it. No biggie if you didn’t.

 

[Lazybones]

Just recognizing one's own biases doesn't make one able to see through (past, around or beyond) their own biases. You've acknowledged that recognition of one's own biases is only the first step.

What's the next step after recognizing one's own biases?

What are you trying to accomplish with this questioning? I would say step 2 is not being condescending to those who disagree with you assessments. Surely you aren’t ready to move to step 2.

Besides, this has nothing to do with NPR, cnn, cbs, nyt all being biased even though the networks and folks on your side of the isle claim they are impartial.

 

[Dadsdream]

Here's the bottom line:

Here’s The Timeline Of The Raid That Left ISIS Leader al-Baghdadi Dead

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, died in a U.S. military operation in Syria Saturday that took around two hours, President Trump confirmed Sunday.

dailycaller.com

Good riddance.

 

[Beach Friends]

Here's the bottom line:

Here’s The Timeline Of The Raid That Left ISIS Leader al-Baghdadi Dead

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, died in a U.S. military operation in Syria Saturday that took around two hours, President Trump confirmed Sunday.

dailycaller.com

Good riddance.

Damn, that place looks like a Hancock county barn turned meth lab. BOOM!

 

[Lazybones]

Damn, that place looks like a Hancock county barn turned meth lab. BOOM!

Jocko would be proud.

 

[V Chip]

This reminds me of the conversation I had earlier where people could not detect that the NY Times article on Tulsi was a smear.

If you use one (or even some) of a news source’s articles by itself, you can claim any news source is biased any way you want. The Washington Post — you know, the one the right says is liberally biased — has run multiple negative / smear stories against Warren and Sanders. The NYT has done the same. Fox News has run things critical of Trump or McConnell or Republicans. It happens.

Writing/running a negative article is not example of a ideological bias. One sentence in an article of scores isn’t either. It takes much more than that to make a source biased.

 

[V Chip]

What are you trying to accomplish with this questioning? I would say step 2 is not being condescending to those who disagree with you assessments.

Are you serious? Your posts have been condescending a LOT in this thread. Should I go back and highlight them all?

 

[LA - L.A.]

I am not a news media outlet homie.

No, you are not. You are however claiming that certain news media outlets are biased. Our biases influence our perceptions of the biases of others, so my question is relevant to the discussion.