Message from @Soup Can Sam

Discord ID: 622259643233730560


2019-09-14 02:34:41 UTC  

not saying that was necessarily the case here, but just something to consider

2019-09-14 02:35:11 UTC  

Honestly they generally do, most journalistic organizations don't even issue retractions when they're straight up wrong

2019-09-14 02:35:16 UTC  

the fires were the same under lula and roussef but no one said shit

2019-09-14 02:35:36 UTC  

I mean I could come up with 3 or 4 examples off the top of my head

2019-09-14 02:35:58 UTC  

That is true, especially in recent years a number of journals has been extremely shotty

2019-09-14 02:36:01 UTC  

man if you really think journalists "generally make stats up on the spot" i feel like you're in fairytale conspiracy land...

2019-09-14 02:36:12 UTC  

and i have nothing wrong with conspiracies

2019-09-14 02:36:16 UTC  

News papers ignoring the firing of rubber bullets into the eyes and throats of yellow vesters being an international example

2019-09-14 02:36:22 UTC  

just a subset of them are very much fairytales

2019-09-14 02:36:37 UTC  

yea but thats omission dude

2019-09-14 02:36:42 UTC  

its not "making stats up"

2019-09-14 02:36:52 UTC  

lie by omission

2019-09-14 02:36:58 UTC  

Covington and Amazonian Forest Fires being another 2

2019-09-14 02:37:00 UTC  

Hmm

2019-09-14 02:37:12 UTC  

Whats a fourth, I may have to actually think about that one for a second

2019-09-14 02:37:19 UTC  

journalist manipulation is rarely about making up statistics, its usually lie by omission or citing dodgy sources

2019-09-14 02:37:21 UTC  

Gender Neutral Santa Clause

2019-09-14 02:37:22 UTC  

"russiagate"

2019-09-14 02:37:32 UTC  

OH YEAH

2019-09-14 02:37:36 UTC  

Russiagate

2019-09-14 02:37:39 UTC  

Hmm

2019-09-14 02:37:42 UTC  

brother i dont follow mainstream media because of things like that

2019-09-14 02:37:43 UTC  

Pizzagate too

2019-09-14 02:37:50 UTC  

but that doesnt mean statistics are made up generally

2019-09-14 02:38:19 UTC  

We aren't saying that they're generally made up, just that it's an entirely plausible possibility

2019-09-14 02:38:24 UTC  

I read an article doomsaying climate disaster by 2023 which didn't even cite a source

2019-09-14 02:38:29 UTC  

soup said they generally make up stats

2019-09-14 02:38:53 UTC  

Another one that actually used a study performed by somebody without a degree or employer who constructed a faulty model from incomplete climate data

2019-09-14 02:38:56 UTC  

*well I'm saying that at least

2019-09-14 02:39:06 UTC  

ye

2019-09-14 02:39:37 UTC  

I'm not saying they "generally make up stats" I'm saying that you can't rely on them to use stats

2019-09-14 02:39:53 UTC  

Soup Can SamToday at 12:35 PM
Honestly they generally do

2019-09-14 02:40:21 UTC  

"manipulate other people's studies to show things they want to show"

2019-09-14 02:40:28 UTC  

That is what I was responding to

2019-09-14 02:40:31 UTC  

Not making up stats

2019-09-14 02:40:45 UTC  

ah okay

2019-09-14 02:40:50 UTC  

being manipulative or simply not putting in due diligence to source a story

2019-09-14 02:41:18 UTC  

thats why i like independent media

2019-09-14 02:41:24 UTC  

far more hyperlinks to sources

2019-09-14 02:41:26 UTC  

I generally prefer it as well

2019-09-14 02:41:38 UTC  

whereas mainstream media go "study says" without linking the study