What is the biggest lesson that employment has taught you?

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

593 comments

As opposed to not lying. You're welcome
- I meant in terms of brand. You’re welcome.
  
  Your question makes no sense bud.
  
  It doesn’t make sense to inquire why a few things are singled out as dishonest when the entity in question is big media which takes a myriad of forms?
  
  No, your question was
  ... As opposed to?
  Which makes no fucking sense. Like it's a cute little snide smuglord gotcha that you can throw out, but what the fuck are you actually asking?
  
  It’s an honest question with relevance to the discussion. You either can answer it or not. And I already elaborated.
  
  Would you rephrase your question then? Because as I've made clear, I don't understand what you are trying to communicate.
  
  You said the source brands I speak of can be said to lie about what’s going on and spin it to something of their liking. Here, the question “as opposed to what” is asked because anyone in any position might argue that the sources they disagree with are lying, so in the spirit of the critical thinking mindset which you say I haven’t learned yet, I’m asking what does one source called out as lying have to indicate it might be lying that the other sources anyone else can call out for lying don’t have.
  
  You said the source brands I speak of can be said to lie about what’s going on and spin it to something of their liking.
  I then highlighted why and showed examples of them having done so.
  . Here, the question “as opposed to what”.
  Lying as opposed to observable reality, for example with regards to the Iraq war and stories about North Korean haircuts. With regards to the Iraq war they themselves have admitted to it, the untruths are well known. With regards to North Korean haircuts this lie has been highlighted by people reporting on the ground, showing it to be untrue.
  called out as lying have to indicate it might be lying that the other sources anyone else can call out for lying don’t have.
  The source "called out for lying" has been proved to have lied. The others have not. You are welcome to prove so - which you do by showing them lying, not by posting some us state dep ghoul saying "oh they're lying".
  
  I then highlighted why and showed examples of them having done so.
  You gave disagreements, it isn’t as if you pointed out holes or contradictions. Anyone can do that.
  Lying as opposed to observable reality, for example with regards to the Iraq war and stories about North Korean haircuts.
  Are you saying you’ve observed them or that I have the power to observe them? If it’s the former, is this something you can prove? If it’s the latter, I’m more than happy to observe when you’re ready (and no, “sources” are not “observation”).
  The source “called out for lying” has been proved to have lied. The others have not.
  Based on what? Based on external sources? That brings us back here.
  
  Alright, this is going in circles, it's obvious you're not acting in good faith, so I am going to disengage

593 comments