Sounds like you are committed and fully engaged in the game. (Good luck with the statistical data backing you up on the random violence part) Good for you.
You know, i've heard shapiro speak a few times from other sources, and he sounded intelligent. But the past couple of posts you've added from his own show (this one and the rant about the grammys) seem a little ridiculous...isn't there something better to discuss, like starting a new republican trend, considering the fact that half of republicans still support trump and believe the capital riot was mostly peaceful or started by leftists?
And this story, Capitol ramming/knife, was on both cbs and nbc national news tonight. Didn't check abc.
I think the problem being pointed out is that the person's ethnicity/religion has been left out of the coverage.
Sounds like you are committed and fully engaged in the game. (Good luck with the statistical data backing you up on the random violence part) Good for you.
You know, i've heard shapiro speak a few times from other sources, and he sounded intelligent. But the past couple of posts you've added from his own show (this one and the rant about the grammys) seem a little ridiculous...isn't there something better to discuss, like starting a new republican trend, considering the fact that half of republicans still support trump and believe the capital riot was mostly peaceful or started by leftists?
And this story, Capitol ramming/knife, was on both cbs and nbc national news tonight. Didn't check abc.
I quit watching after a minute because he only talked about himself. And he's an asshole whenever he speaks.
But the message, crudely made, is peripherally valid. Sure, it's hypocritical to point out when it's a white male "christian" shooter and not carry on about this guy's heritage and religion. But you know as well as I do that MUCH more will be made of another muslim terrorist and it will only serve to inflame tensions and bolster support for war etc. etc. so it does sort of make sense from a lot of points of view to gloss over that.
All that being said, I am confident that 9 out of 10 of the next dozen mass shootings or other random violence in the US will be perpetrated by white guys. So what's Shapiro's point again?
Shapiro's point is that 9 out of 10 of the next dozen mass shootings or other random violence in the US that you hear about will be perpetrated by white guys, and that any act of violence that doesn't reinforce a narrative that there is an epidemic of white supremacist violence perpetrated by white guys will be treated as local news with no national importance. You can hear that...after about the 1 minute mark.
Shapiro can be a dick (and the video may be sped up in this clip because he sounds a little chipmonkie) but that doesn't make him wrong. Our news media is partisan. It's warping perception of social problems and sometimes creating them out of whole cloth. He doesn't mention the role right-wing media plays in this because he plays for team red, but the problem he's pointing out is real.
And no, right-wing media narratives do not negate, counter, or in any way excuse left-wing media narratives. Both are destructive, both are driving the country into tribal conflict. If things go all 1968 on us these narratives will bear most of the blame.
Sounds like you are committed and fully engaged in the game. (Good luck with the statistical data backing you up on the random violence part) Good for you.
You know, i've heard shapiro speak a few times from other sources, and he sounded intelligent. But the past couple of posts you've added from his own show (this one and the rant about the grammys) seem a little ridiculous...isn't there something better to discuss, like starting a new republican trend, considering the fact that half of republicans still support trump and believe the capital riot was mostly peaceful or started by leftists?
I quit watching after a minute because he only talked about himself. And he's an asshole whenever he speaks.
But the message, crudely made, is peripherally valid. Sure, it's hypocritical to point out when it's a white male "christian" shooter and not carry on about this guy's heritage and religion. But you know as well as I do that MUCH more will be made of another muslim terrorist and it will only serve to inflame tensions and bolster support for war etc. etc. so it does sort of make sense from a lot of points of view to gloss over that.
All that being said, I am confidentthat 9 out of 10 of the next dozen mass shootings or other random violence in the US will be perpetrated by white guys. So what's Shapiro's point again?
Sounds like you are committed and fully engaged in the game. (Good luck with the statistical data backing you up on the random violence part) Good for you.
I quit watching after a minute because he only talked about himself. And he's an asshole whenever he speaks.
But the message, crudely made, is peripherally valid. Sure, it's hypocritical to point out when it's a white male "christian" shooter and not carry on about this guy's heritage and religion. But you know as well as I do that MUCH more will be made of another muslim terrorist and it will only serve to inflame tensions and bolster support for war etc. etc. so it does sort of make sense from a lot of points of view to gloss over that.
All that being said, I am confident that 9 out of 10 of the next dozen mass shootings or other random violence in the US will be perpetrated by white guys. So what's Shapiro's point again?
well, I didn't watch that but I watched this and it was immensely entertaining
I watched the first 30 minutes or so and it is good, though Harris seems to be fixated on religion and Peterson seems to think in larger terms at least in the particular part of the discussion that I watched.
Interesting snippet from Harris that he was trying to indict religion on, but I would submit that the context of this notion is more relevant to well meaning followers of social justice fads and both sides of the Red and Blue tribes in America today as much any historical religious issues:
Believing things strongly on bad evidence.
Will have to watch the rest when I have time, but it is nice to see honest discussions with different view points by 2 learned individuals.BTW that moderator is fantastic, he should be the official moderator of everything.
I put this interview in this thread because not only is the content fascinating moreover this is a text book case of what journalism should be. Kudos to the interviewer, she gives hope that true journalism is not dead and of course kudos to Dr. Peterson who I am thankful to have found my public voice. Like Dr. Peterson, I am not interested in being placed in a group and try to avoid identity. I am grateful to you and others (Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, Ben Shapiro and to a lesser extent Rubin, Larry Elder and even Joe Rogan) who articulately speak for me as much as anyone can. Keep your shoulders square, head up and your eye on personal responsibility.
well, I didn't watch that but I watched this and it was immensely entertaining
A conservative (short) history of media bias with a solid conclusion:
Today, then, we are back to where we were in the past. Citizens have numerous options for news and information, and numerous alternatives that challenge, balance, and correct the partisan biases of the mainstream media. More importantly, this new media world means that in a democracy ruled by the people, the responsibility for sorting out truth from partisan spin lies where it should, with the free citizens who have the civic duty to seek out and evaluate information before voting for a party or policy. Media bias is no longer an excuse for neglecting that responsibility.
I put this interview in this thread because not only is the content fascinating moreover this is a text book case of what journalism should be. Kudos to the interviewer, she gives hope that true journalism is not dead and of course kudos to Dr. Peterson who I am thankful to have found my public voice. Like Dr. Peterson, I am not interested in being placed in a group and try to avoid identity. I am grateful to you and others (Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, Ben Shapiro and to a lesser extent Rubin, Larry Elder and even Joe Rogan) who articulately speak for me as much as anyone can. Keep your shoulders square, head up and your eye on personal responsibility.
The video has nothing to do with so-called media bias. But it is a great, thought provoking interview and I thank you for posting it SirD.
Peterson's response to so-called Media bias might be to focus on the bias on the individuals.
Minor quibble. Marxist-inspired/influenced leftists come in all shapes and sizes. Towards the end, the old-style Communists were increasingly conservative and free market friendly. It is the Neo-Marxist ones and others who simply feed off feelings of envy that do the most damage.
This could have been filed under Identity Politics. Or ....... Identity politics underpinned by vacuous virtue signalling.
This kind of in-depth journalism is similar to what is called investigative journalism elsewhere. There is all kinds of great investigative/in-depth journalism in various elite media throughout the world. NPR, PBS, NYT, WP, G&M, CBC, Radio-Canada, The Atlantic are just some media outlets that come to mind that are capable of this kind of journalism.
