Kentucky To Record License Plates At Church Services, Quarantine Car Occupants

[sl1pstream 551]

 

7 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

As difficult as it might be, let us know when you manage to get to the end of the list. I'm not satisfied with only one straw man.

I don't think you've actually read that factcheck one on snopes either.
 

Quote

This widely circulated e-mail contains a number of false claims about the urban legend-busting Snopes.com and its proprietors, Barbara and David Mikkelson, who started the site in 1995 and still run it. They’re accused of hiding their identities, doing shoddy research, producing articles with a liberal bent and discrediting an anti-Obama State Farm agent out of partisanship.

Did you just stop reading in the middle of that chainmail?

 

Quote

“You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people,” David Mikkelson said. We checked online to see if he had given money to any federal candidates, and nothing turned up. Mikkelson even faxed us a copy of his voter registration form. He asked us not to post an image of it here, but we can confirm that it shows he declined to state a party affiliation when he registered last year, and also that when he registered in 2000 he did so as a Republican.

Do the Snopes.com articles reveal a political bias? We reviewed a sampling of their political offerings, including some on rumors about George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, and we found them to be utterly poker-faced. David does say that the site receives more complaints that it is too liberal than that it is too conservative. Nevertheless, he says, “We apply the same debunking standards to both sides.”

Did you plan on posting something that was anti-Snopes? Clearly that ain't it.
 

Tenesseestar: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-tennessee-star/

 

And Babylon Bee is often shared as real news by thousands of idiots, so yes, fact checking them is necessary. It wouldn't be if they were actually good at satire, but deceit doesn't equal satire. Even if you don't think The Onion is funny, at least their audience knows that it's satire. Babylon Bee has a bunch of people in their comments yelling about whatever was posted like it's actually a real article. A small group might know that it's just a bad attempt at satire but that doesn't stop it from being shared all over social media as yet another real news article.

I got to the end of the list, happy?

Edited April 14, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Ban Hammer 13,421]

10 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Well yeah, when there is so little actual satire in the content that it just looks like a fake news article, that's what happens. IIRC, Snopes even said they were not sure if the article was blatantly fake news or just a horrible attempt at satire.

seems more like snopes is clueless.

[sl1pstream 551]

Quote

Burnt Reynolds reacted to this

That's one way to admit that you're wrong, I guess. I'm still super curious why you decided to post that factcheck link on Snopes, did you just not read it? It seems super out of place in that list.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

6 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

seems more like snopes is clueless.

 

  Babylon Bee is derisive of the left. Perhaps that is why many on the right enjoy the stories, but that doesn't make it satire. Satire contains elements of derision. That does not mean purely derisive articles are satire. Satire is not an easy literary form to master. There are at least 12 other elements of satire besides ridicule. Babylon Bee might try adding another 1 or 2 of them to their repertoire. 

 

  At any rate, this is probably all for nothing. I doubt Babylon Bee's mission is actually to come up with good satire. They have found their niche. They should just call it what it is. They are trolling the left, they are good at that, and that is all they ever wanted to be. 

 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

40 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

I don't think you've actually read that factcheck one on snopes either.

I did, and anyone else who did, and has reading comprehension, might come out of it with an understanding that inserting the word "fact" or "fact checker" into a debate is usually done in absence of substance. Also that people aren't "objective"/"unbiased". 

 

I could come up with a dozen more sources that demonstrate Snopes' bias. Hint: If the source tries to present itself as unbiased, especially obvious when employing the "identity" of inserting the word "fact" into itself, it's inherently untrustworthy. 

 

14 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Babylon Bee is derisive of the left. Perhaps that is why many on the right enjoy the stories, but that doesn't make it satire. Satire contains elements of derision. That does not mean purely derisive articles are satire. Satire is not an easy literary form to master. There are at least 12 other elements of satire besides ridicule. Babylon Bee might try adding another 1 or 2 of them to their repertoire. 

 

  At any rate, this is probably all for nothing. I doubt Babylon Bee's mission is actually to come up with good satire. They have found their niche. They should just call it what it is. They are trolling the left, they are good at that, and that is all they ever wanted to be. 

 

I would look to why the left feel "trolled" when they're parodied. Because I spent much of my life parodying Christians (e.g. the evangelical right) who take life too seriously. Quite the coincidence how the left have become the way they were.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Ban Hammer 13,421]

10 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Babylon Bee is derisive of the left. Perhaps that is why many on the right enjoy the stories, but that doesn't make it satire. Satire contains elements of derision. That does not mean purely derisive articles are satire. Satire is not an easy literary form to master. There are at least 12 other elements of satire besides ridicule. Babylon Bee might try adding another 1 or 2 of them to their repertoire. 

 

  At any rate, this is probably all for nothing. I doubt Babylon Bee's mission is actually to come up with good satire. They have found their niche. They should just call it what it is. They are trolling the left, they are good at that, and that is all they ever wanted to be. 

 

apparently they are pretty good at what they do, as snopes found it "necessary" to fact check them............
i'd rate that as the ultimate troll  award.

[Dashinka 24,629]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Well yeah, when there is so little actual satire in the content that it just looks like a fake news article, that's what happens. IIRC, Snopes even said they were not sure if the article was blatantly fake news or just a horrible attempt at satire.

So is CNN trying to do satire as well?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

17 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

So is CNN trying to do satire as well?

Accidentally. 😂

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Another jurisdiction is starting to back down, caving on fines within a few hours of the DOJ getting involved, but the DOJ isn't done:

Quote

The Department of Justice is siding with a Mississippi church after churchgoers were ticketed while attending a drive-in church service amid the coronavirus crisis.

Police officers began issuing $500 tickets to congregants who refused to leave a parking lot of Temple Baptist Church in Greenville, Miss. The church later sued police.

 

Quote

 

A portion of a statement sent by the DOJ reads; “The city appears to have thereby singled churches out as the only essential service (as designated by the state of Mississippi) that may not operate despite following all CDC and state recommendations regarding social distancing."

The Department filed a Statement of Interest in support of the church. In it it explains that they believe that the city has not acted evenhandedly.

The City has since stated it will drop the fines, but says it will continue to enforce the order.

 

https://www.wlbt.com/2020/04/14/doj-intervenes-miss-drive-in-church-case-says-citys-actions-target-religious-conduct/

[Dashinka 24,629]

27 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Another jurisdiction is starting to back down, caving on fines within a few hours of the DOJ getting involved, but the DOJ isn't done:

https://www.wlbt.com/2020/04/14/doj-intervenes-miss-drive-in-church-case-says-citys-actions-target-religious-conduct/

Governors and local leaders are just trying to find a new source of revenue.

[Ban Hammer 13,421]

Quote

The City has since stated it will drop the fines, but says it will continue to enforce the order.

sounds like a waste of tax dollars and police effort.

[Dashinka 24,629]

15 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

sounds like a waste of tax dollars and police effort.

And potentially a violation of social distancing.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

16 hours ago, sl1pstream said:

When you're starting your list with Washington Times, you're going to have to do better.

When you're starting your post with Snopes, you pretty much already lost.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4730092/Snopes-brink-founder-accused-fraud-lying.html 

 

Quote

'Fact checking' website Snopes on verge of collapse after founder is accused of fraud, lies, and putting prostitutes and his honeymoon on expenses (and it hasn't told its readers THOSE facts)

 

[TBoneTX 45,572]

6 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Governors and local leaders are just trying to find a new source of revenue.

If they hadn't shut their cities and counties down, they'd have had more revenue.  

[sl1pstream 551]

6 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

When you're starting your post with Snopes, you pretty much already lost.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4730092/Snopes-brink-founder-accused-fraud-lying.html 

 

 

Is it really that hard to check for sources, other than a UK tabloid that Snopes has been critical of in the past?

 

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/tacoma-based-snopes-debunker-of-fake-news-is-locked-in-a-nasty-legal-dispute/

 

A lawsuit Snopes eventually won. Because it was bullshit. It's a cute article though, and it confirms its reader's biases while also being something they can point at the next time one of their horrible articles ends up on Snopes.

 

Ars Technica has a decent article on the whole thing.

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/07/who-owns-snopes-fracas-over-fact-checking-site-now-front-and-center/

 

There's no mention of prostitution anywhere. I guess spicing it up makes a certain group of people more interested than the actual, pretty boring, real story behind it.

Edited April 15, 2020 by sl1pstream