When reading anything ALWAYS ask these questions:

[Skwmom]

Last edited Wed Apr 13, 2016, 09:24 AM - Edit history (1)

1. Who owns the publication?
2. What ties do they have to any of the candidates?
3. What candidate will benefit their financial interests?
4. Does the article support the candidates latest manufactured false memes?
5. Is the article cited frequently by the corporate media whores?

Answering these questions will tell you whether the article is worth the paper it is written on. And in today's corporate sponsored propaganda environment the answer usually is, HELL NO!

Can some of you gifted writers PLEASE write some articles on this subject.

Update: Also, please write about the sly way that they smear Bernie. The NY Times was called on the article that they changed about Bernie. But that is just one of many. I spoke to a person a couple of days ago that noted he will read an interesting article about Bernie in the morning, only to note that it is negatively slanted in the afternoon when he pulls it back up to show someone.

Propaganda: We could teach Russia a thing or two.

[Buzz Clik]

1. Let's cut to the chase:

1. Does it support Bernie?
a. If yes, it's credible.
b. If no, ignore it.

[kgnu_fan]

2. Kick

[SidDithers]

3. Exactly...

For example, here's a thread from the recently banned troll WillyT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511264163

We've seen this false meme posted all over DU, the idea that Hillary raising money for downticket Dems is somehow buying them off.

Note that you enthusiastically bought into the meme being propagated by the OP and the article posted at observer.com.

Now, about The New York Observer.

1. Who owns the publication?

Well, it's owned by Jared Kushner, who just happens to be the son-in-law of Donald Trump.

2. What ties do they have to any of the candidates?

Obviously, they have very close tie to the Trump campaign.

3. What candidate will benefit from their financial interests?

Again, Trump?

4. Does the article support the candidates latest manufactured false memes?

Obviously, benefiting the Trump campaign by attacking the campaign of the leading Democratic candidate.

5. Is the article cited frequently by the corporate media whores.

Amazingly enough, observer.com is cited frequently by DUers. Make of that what you wil.



Sources always matter. Some, on the fringe left, however, are all too happy to jump into bed with the asshats at observer.com, or the Blaze, or Daily Caller, or Washington Free Beacon, or downtrend.com, as long as those publications are attacking the Clintons.

Physician, heal thyself.

Sid