[identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] politicartoons


Right wing news and talk radio were gleeful when reports circulated that Paul Krugman had declared bankruptcy.

Except it wasn't true.



Paul Krugman thought the whole incident was pretty funny.

Date: 2013-03-12 09:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hardblue.livejournal.com
Krugman should probably have secret service protection, considering how much the right-wing wish him ill - truth hurts.

Pfft

Date: 2013-03-12 09:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Conservatives make their own facts.

Date: 2013-03-12 10:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hardblue.livejournal.com
Does she still have a place at Fox?

Date: 2013-03-13 04:26 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
I won't lie. I'd do her.

Date: 2013-03-13 04:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fizzyland.livejournal.com
I understand - I would defile Elizabeth Hasselbeck, despite her empty-headed conservatism.

Date: 2013-03-14 08:13 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anfalicious.livejournal.com
She has the dead eyes of a souleater.

Re: Pfft

Date: 2013-03-13 02:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Well, what happened is the Daily Currant site (which is a satire site that's tripped up people (http://politicartoons.livejournal.com/3251079.html) here before) posted the story, which was then picked up by Boston.com, which is how it got to Breitbart.

Date: 2013-03-13 05:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chron-job.livejournal.com
Which would be a dismissable error, had Brietbart.com not so vociferously castigated the Washington Post author Suzi Parker for being fooled by the same satire site just a couple of weeks ago...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/02/12/Washington-Post-Falls-For-Hoax-Palin-Story-Palin-Hits-Back-on-Twitter

If Parker had a shred of self-awareness, integrity, and dignity, she would have changed the headline to "Too Good To Check," and under it posted an essay about how shallow, smug, bitterly angry partisanship can blind you to common sense.

But that would require having a soul to search



Brietbart.com's author criticized the Washington Post for being weaselly in its correction. Notice that Brietbart.com has posted no correction, they simply removed the article, even though their own search still tries to point to it.
Edited Date: 2013-03-13 05:45 am (UTC)

Date: 2013-03-13 11:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Larry O'Connor also isn't John Nolte.

Date: 2013-03-13 02:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chron-job.livejournal.com
Which makes us wonder how we should consider / judge Brietbart.com.

I wouldn't hold one author on LiveJournal responsible for the mistakes of the other.

But I would expect that at an organization like a newspaper, there would be an overarching quality control and editorial voice, such that when the paper in general does what it criticizes in others, one is valid in calling out its hypocrisy.

So, is Brietbart.com more like a newspaper? Or is it more like LiveJournal?

Date: 2013-03-13 02:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
It's more like a newspaper, but a partisan one. I'm not a fan, but I'm not a fan of partisan media in general.

I don't think it's especially damning to quote the Boston Globe, and then remove the post when you learn that the Globe got hoodwinked. The problem with this post is the missing context - the assumption that it was Breitbart who got hoodwinked by the false source while leaving unspoken the Globe's error.

Date: 2013-03-13 02:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chron-job.livejournal.com
> I don't think it's especially damning to quote the Boston Globe, and then remove the post when you learn
> that the Globe got hoodwinked.

It isn't JUST the Globe that got hoodwinked.

The reason why this kind of behavior is frustrating, and why we should hold the Globe, Brietbart.com, and the Washington Post (in the previous instance) up to ridicule and derision, is that such events demonstrate how little journalistic 'work' they can get by on. A news organization is supposed to check the facts, not simply re-transmit. The reason we are extra suspicious of 'partisan media' is partly our suspicion that they will check less carefully that which matches their narrative. That's why the criticisms here of Brietbart.com, as well as Nolte's of the Washington Post, are so apt. The players are revealed as Repeaters Of Tidbits, and they don't even bother to check very carefully what they are repeating.

That kind of thing is fine for individuals talking on a blog. We expect something more from news organizations. The only question is, does Brietbart.com, as an entity, put on airs of being a news organization?

Date: 2013-03-13 04:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
A news organization is supposed to check the facts, not simply re-transmit.

I agree completely. This piece at HuffPo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-greenhut/media-bias_b_2859610.html) made a lot of sense anyway, doubly so in the context of this post. \

The reason we are extra suspicious of 'partisan media' is partly our suspicion that they will check less carefully that which matches their narrative.

Well, the problem is that, with some exceptions, people are merely more suspicious of media that doesn't match their narrative when it comes to partisan sources. The same people who will ridicule Breitbart love quoting Media Matters, the same people who deride ThinkProgress will then link to WorldNetDaily. It's better to be skeptical of all media, blatantly partisan media moreso than the others. That doesn't happen enough.

The only question is, does Brietbart.com, as an entity, put on airs of being a news organization?

Not any more so than, say, Huffington or Salon.

Date: 2013-03-14 08:19 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anfalicious.livejournal.com
Isn't it bullshit that we have to fact check the media. They're supposed to be the fact checkers.

Date: 2013-03-14 11:39 am (UTC)

Date: 2013-03-14 08:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anfalicious.livejournal.com
Now that is some delicious irony.

Date: 2013-03-13 10:22 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pacotelic.livejournal.com
What should Breitbart be fined for this transgression?

Also, can you draft up a list of prices for Armed Robbery, Fraud, and Murder? I'm going to Vegas this spring and want to sock away enough cash.

Date: 2013-03-13 10:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-rukh.livejournal.com
Actually you get a bonus if the fraud is over 10 million.

Date: 2013-03-14 08:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anfalicious.livejournal.com
Or you know, Google shit before you put it on a "news" site.

Date: 2013-03-12 10:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] johnny9fingers.livejournal.com
"Apparently this Keynesian thing doesn't really work on the micro level."

That's why it's called Macro-Economics. Unless someone comes up with a unified economic theory, it will always be like that.

Gotta love Breitbart's copy-pasta

Date: 2013-03-12 10:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com
I was gonna say.

Date: 2013-03-13 01:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goumindong.livejournal.com
Also, personal economics "a.k.a. will i go bankrupt" =/= microeconomics so its doubly dumb.

Date: 2013-03-13 05:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tcpip.livejournal.com
Oh, I don't know. I spend good money on champagne to get myself out of a depression on a regular basis.

Date: 2013-03-14 10:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tcpip.livejournal.com
I'm very fond of Laphroig myself, but the comment was more in reference to Keynes' last words.

Date: 2013-03-12 10:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] estella7.livejournal.com
My bat shit neighbor loves this website. It's a constant pummeling on Facebook with his stupid Breitbart.com links. I've grown to loathe this website.

Date: 2013-03-12 11:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com
Breitbart: POST THEN VERIFY!
Edited Date: 2013-03-12 11:16 pm (UTC)

Date: 2013-03-12 11:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lafinjack.livejournal.com
Measure once, cut twice.

Date: 2013-03-12 11:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] aviv-b.livejournal.com
I think Krugman should start a twitter rumor that Breitbart is a sparkly unicorn.

Date: 2013-03-13 02:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] namey.livejournal.com
That's what they want you to think.

Date: 2013-03-13 01:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sealwhiskers.livejournal.com
This shit made my day!

Date: 2013-03-13 01:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dexeron.livejournal.com
I just want to get a screenshot of J. K. Simmons playing J. Jonah Jameson, really angry and shouting, and just caption it: "KRUUUUUUUUGMAAAAN!!!!!"

Date: 2013-03-13 06:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] udoswald.livejournal.com
Color me not surprised. This is Breitbart we're talking about. They straight up make things up out of whole cloth so I'm never surprised when they pull something like this.

Also, I fail to see how that website is satirical. Not everything on The Onion is funny in my opinion but you can usually see the punchline. I fail to see the joke here other than that the author seems not to understand how personal debt differs from national debt and how national debt can be stimulative while personal debt cannot.

Profile

Political Cartoons

March 2023

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
121314151617 18
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 11th, 2025 02:28 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios