Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

This has been covered in the news, I believe. I've read about it a few days ago. It is tragic, and the killers should obviously be charged and jailed.

There were 229 white on black murders in the US in 2015 (the year I could easily find numbers for).

Were they all reported heavily in the media?

In the same year there were 500 black on white murders. Were they all ignored by the media?

Simple fact is some murders get heavy coverage and some don't regardless of who kills who.

If it were a left/right issue then you would expect that any right leaning media would report it a lot. Seems they're generally ignoring it just as much as the left.

In general, you can take any mainstream media outlet and it's going to report the "news" slanted to whichever side its audience is on. With the current state of "news channels" such as it is, it would be ridiculously naive and borderline idiotic to not know which major networks subscribe to a liberal viewpoint versus a conservative one. Ultimately, most people tend to watch whatever source they identify with most and, of course, reject the opposite as fabrications lies, liberal or conservative agendas, etc.. These are just buzz words that they use to try to solidify their "rationale" mostly to themselves and others who agree with them.

What I'm getting at is that it might be more productive to try to do real research from multiple media sources to get the whole story about a subject before you just express something to the effect of " I think. because of what i saw on a channel or read on a website that just happens to share my same political position."
Facts are facts are facts, but we already know that the way they're presented is affected by who is doing the presenting and what side of the spectrum they're on. It is rather difficult to find a source that is unbiased completely. That being said, if you're really trying to be honest about your opinion and why you believe something, then it's crucial to do your best to research multiple sources on both sides in order to decide how you feel. If all you really want to do is express an opinion without doing the legwork to support the opinion, then what's the point? You already think you're right and anyone who disagrees has to be wrong as far as you're concerned. Personally, even if it turned out I was wrong about something, I'd rather be proven wrong than to just continue thinking I was right based on what I just decided was true especilly if i based that solely on media sources that I know already align with my side of the liberal/conservative spectrum.

Just food for thought,

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
There were 229 white on black murders in the US in 2015 (the year I could easily find numbers for).

Were they all reported heavily in the media?

In the same year there were 500 black on white murders. Were they all ignored by the media?

Simple fact is some murders get heavy coverage and some don't regardless of who kills who.

If it were a left/right issue then you would expect that any right leaning media would report it a lot. Seems they're generally ignoring it just as much as the left.

Good points.

Maybe the simple truth is, the left wing media isn't really that left, and the right wing media isn't that right.


I mean, would a lefty ignore immigrant working conditions, safety issues, pay, health care..? No one in the mainstream really reports this, as far as I've seen.

And all the Fox really does is whine about how unfair the "left" is. I sometimes wonder if anyone working there is even a Republican, the same as I wonder about Ann Coulter.

Originally posted by Jojofreakboy
In general, you can take any mainstream media outlet and it's going to report the "news" slanted to whichever side its audience is on. With the current state of "news channels" such as it is, it would be ridiculously naive and borderline idiotic to not know which major networks subscribe to a liberal viewpoint versus a conservative one. Ultimately, most people tend to watch whatever source they identify with most and, of course, reject the opposite as fabrications lies, liberal or conservative agendas, etc.. These are just buzz words that they use to try to solidify their "rationale" mostly to themselves and others who agree with them.

What I'm getting at is that it might be more productive to try to do real research from multiple media sources to get the whole story about a subject before you just express something to the effect of " I think. because of what i saw on a channel or read on a website that just happens to share my same political position."
Facts are facts are facts, but we already know that the way they're presented is affected by who is doing the presenting and what side of the spectrum they're on. It is rather difficult to find a source that is unbiased completely. That being said, if you're really trying to be honest about your opinion and why you believe something, then it's crucial to do your best to research multiple sources on both sides in order to decide how you feel. If all you really want to do is express an opinion without doing the legwork to support the opinion, then what's the point? You already think you're right and anyone who disagrees has to be wrong as far as you're concerned. Personally, even if it turned out I was wrong about something, I'd rather be proven wrong than to just continue thinking I was right based on what I just decided was true especilly if i based that solely on media sources that I know already align with my side of the liberal/conservative spectrum.

Just food for thought,


What's the point of journalism?


Because, while what you're saying makes perfect sense, what you're essentially asking people to do, is to become journalists.



That's supposed to be the JOB of media. Or, so they keep telling us, any time something threatens the "freedom of the press".



If the public needs to be self informed about whether the media is being honest with them, then I'd argue that's proof enough the press isn't doing the job we're constantly told they exist to do: Exist as a source of transparency for the public, and a bulwark against the kind of propaganda which lead to a Nazi Germany.

Perhaps legislation to break off factual news from opinion piece news is necessary. That way you can hold news supposedly based in fact to account more easily when they mislead their audience.

Originally posted by cdtm
What's the point of journalism?


Because, while what you're saying makes perfect sense, what you're essentially asking people to do, is to become journalists.



That's supposed to be the JOB of media. Or, so they keep telling us, any time something threatens the "freedom of the press".



If the public needs to be self informed about whether the media is being honest with them, then I'd argue that's proof enough the press isn't doing the job we're constantly told they exist to do: Exist as a source of transparency for the public, and a bulwark against the kind of propaganda which lead to a Nazi Germany.

I do not disagree in the least. Ideally, we have moved well beyond any situation where we can trust the MSM to provide unbiased facts. In the past, they probably did a lot of "spin" but we were perhaps more naive and less willing to believe that the facts could be misreported with intent because we literally had no way to verify those facts. Now we are inundated with far more news sources than at any other time in human history. The more available sources there are for "news," the more competitive each source becomes - trying to capture your attention and get your viewership or hits on their website or sales of their printed papers. It's doubtful that there has been an unbiased reporting of the news, at least in my 47 years. With that probability in mind, at least now we have the ability to do as much fact-checking with as many resources as possible to try to get as much of the truth as possible to make informed decisions on what we choose to believe. It certainly is maddening and quite ridiculous. If only we could ensure the MSM would simply report facts without a "Slant." I do not see how that is possible, though. For every extreme left media source, there is an extreme far right. Each extreme has its own agenda to push to make you feel one way or the other. The rift between the two sides is growing exponentially, and the moderate liberal and conservative groups who have the best chance at orchestrating compromise is shrinking. I honestly wish we could rely on journalists to report just the facts, but that is never going to be "sexy enough" or "provocative enough" for the companies who would do anything to keep our attention away from the competition.
I do not believe it SHOULD be necessary to fact check journalist but, it has become necessary to do so in order to try to make sense of any news story being reported. Every story has been twisted and contorted to please the financial supporters of any given news company, online, television, or print. Now we are forced to take steps to hold accountable those who deal in mass media information for the intentional manipulation of that information reported in a manner which is solely in the best interests of media conglomerates' political affiliates and influencers instead of the interests of the American people who deserve to be provided the facts - free from intentional political "spin" so they may form more honest opinions.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
There were 229 white on black murders in the US in 2015 (the year I could easily find numbers for).

Were they all reported heavily in the media?

In the same year there were 500 black on white murders. Were they all ignored by the media?

Simple fact is some murders get heavy coverage and some don't regardless of who kills who.

If it were a left/right issue then you would expect that any right leaning media would report it a lot. Seems they're generally ignoring it just as much as the left. I think left/right is the wrong dynamic for this particular issue. The old right wing angle would've been to pick up this story for race baiting purposes.

These days, they want the black vote. They aren't going for that angle anymore cause it's not politically feasible. Where as the left wing is in favor of exposing what they see as acts of racism towards blacks by whites because that gels with their agenda. So if this situation was reversed and it was 5 white teens who killed a black man, they would easily recognise the association that sort of thing has with the racist history of this country.

When 5 black kids kill a white man you assume it was some sort of robbery gone wrong. Which in this case it seems to have been.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
There were 229 white on black murders in the US in 2015 (the year I could easily find numbers for).

Were they all reported heavily in the media?

In the same year there were 500 black on white murders. Were they all ignored by the media?

Simple fact is some murders get heavy coverage and some don't regardless of who kills who.

If it were a left/right issue then you would expect that any right leaning media would report it a lot. Seems they're generally ignoring it just as much as the left.

Always that question, who actually decides, and why.


I keep flip flopping between business decisions and political, but looking at the Twitter leaks I'm wondering if there's even a difference.

You hate the left and mass media because you're a gullible retard who lets random youtubers' context-bereft videos influence your world views?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
You hate the left and mass media because you're a gullible retard who lets random youtubers' context-bereft videos influence your world views? I seriously believe he/it was a right wing sock. Maybe Fly.

The jojo character in this thread is one of 2 jojo's from Arizona with a birthday today. The other person posting is CDTM.

Another birthday today is Nippon Daisuki, another very far righted...

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
what was the point of this thread... from a "black" poster?

starflyerhneobrooklyn is probably hiding on alt-reality discord with the other cultists

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
starflyerhneobrooklyn is probably hiding on alt-reality discord with the other cultists or still very much among us here. Which is my present theory.

I agree with that jaden guy. He's clearly a genius. But not like a Kanye type genius.

Originally posted by Jaden_3.0
I agree with that jaden guy. He's clearly a genius. But not like a Kanye type genius. jaden... jaja? Seems highly unlikely, but what a cover!

SquallX is another Trumper that seemed to have magically vanished after Trump lost and the Jan 6th insurrection failed...

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
or still very much among us here. Which is my present theory.

could be. i have suspicions which I'll not voice, but if it's them, glad they got bored with being the internet's most active low wattage troll ever.

The only user I knew who left after Jan 6th was Supra and magically, a lot of suspicious socks.

The discord was probably only 4 or 5 people anyway. I think Supra made sock accounts on the discord as well because one user was called "Robtard the Retard."

First of all, it's offensive to call people Robtard. Second of all, Retard never joined the discord.

I think you all just miss having people to disagree with

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
could be. i have suspicions which I'll not voice, but if it's them, glad they got bored with being the internet's most active low wattage troll ever. Yes, that aligns with my thoughts also.

Originally posted by Macklemore
The only user I knew who left after Jan 6th was Supra and magically, a lot of suspicious socks.

The discord was probably only 4 or 5 people anyway. I think Supra made sock accounts on the discord as well because one user was called "Robtard the Retard."

First of all, it's offensive to call people Robtard. Second of all, Retard never joined the discord. DDM, Silent Master, Snowdragon, Fly, Surtur's monumental meltdown, Scribbles posting necro paedo stuff and verbally assaulting Imp and I in particular with some frankly vile comments about family, imps time as a soldier etc. Eon/Klaw's meltdowns, Squall X leaving etc. etc.Originally posted by Smurph
I think you all just miss having people to disagree with Nah, the kind of stuff they were propagating isn't fun to read.

Originally posted by Macklemore
The only user I knew who left after Jan 6th was Supra and magically, a lot of suspicious socks.

The discord was probably only 4 or 5 people anyway. I think Supra made sock accounts on the discord as well because one user was called "Robtard the Retard."

First of all, it's offensive to call people Robtard. Second of all, Retard never joined the discord.

tbh I'm not specifically targeting voltron, but discord seems to be the home to standardized cult45 hugboxes

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
DDM, Silent Master, Snowdragon, Fly, Surtur's monumental meltdown, Scribbles posting necro paedo stuff and verbally assaulting Imp and I in particular with some frankly vile comments about family, imps time as a soldier etc. Eon/Klaw's meltdowns, Squall X leaving etc. etc. Nah, the kind of stuff they were propagating isn't fun to read. I don't get it. One minute Scribble is a quiet book reading book writing transgender, then he's a psycho nazi troll.

nah she was a manipulative malignant shit the whole time.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Nah, the kind of stuff they were propagating isn't fun to read. I agree, but that's why I didn't post here when that garbage was in every thread of the forum.

Now the GDF just seems kinda adrift without a central conflict.

Originally posted by Smurph
I agree, but that's why I didn't post here when that garbage was in every thread of the forum.

Now the GDF just seems kinda adrift without a central conflict. I think it is more an information and sharing point now. We don't always agree on things, it's less UScentric. For example DT, Macklemore, Jaden and I are all British and we have very different political alignments. None of us are really into the woke, not woke stuff that defines the US popular culture. The Americans are mostly middle of the road progressives, far to the right of me probably.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
I think it is more an information and sharing point now. We don't always agree on things, it's less UScentric. For example DT, Macklemore, Jaden and I are all British and we have very different political alignments. None of us are really into the woke, not woke stuff that defines the US popular culture. The Americans are mostly middle of the road progressives, far to the right of me probably.


Maybe. Americans used to actually be taught in schools that forcing collective actions is a gateway to totalitarianism.

Yet the acceptance of pandemic measures show Americans are just fine sacrificing liberty for perceived safety.

Sure, collective action in the face of a national emergency sounds like a sane choice to most of the world, but you have to remember we bucked perfectly legal British policies as a colony. The pandemic attitude would have accepted the stamp act with heads bowed, and no revolution would have been possible at current attitudes.

Yeah. Totally bro.

Trying to contain a viral outbreak is just like being unfairly taxed and exploited by the British Empire in the 1700's.