Jump to content

Shots Fired! Tim Graham calls out Vic Carruci for Posing with The Biscuit


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

There is a thing you can do when that happens....wait, wait, it'll come to me....

 

Announce it?

3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Alright guys, show's over.  Coach Tuesday has lost interest. You know what that means.

 

@PromoTheRobot , get out of here, and go to the next UB topic.

 

@DrDawkinstein, I think somebody is defending Russ Brandon somewhere, go get 'em.

 

@BADOLBILZ, Shady's radio show starts at 11 am sharp, start preparing

 

@Hapless Bills Fan, I'm POSITIVE some other topic needs moderating.

 

I think that's it.  Or, wait.  Maybe we can keep talking about a topic that Coach Tuesday has lost interest in.  Does anyone know if that's allowed?  Can someone check the TOS?

 

This thread is the equivalent of a practice fight.  We need the pads to go on and we need to start hitting other teams.  This is booooooring stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

No, no that wasn't it.....it'll come to me....I GOT IT!  You could set us a great example by ceasing to read and contribute to it yourself!

 

Eh, that's not my style.  I'll drive 50 miles just to vote "undecided."

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

There can be, yes.  But increasingly I see this pattern, and I think it's a problem:

1) "tweets" are used because they aren't held to the same standard of multiple sources/verification as actual articles

2) journalists use tweets to "break" news and claim kudos, in part because of 1)

3) other media then actually cite the tweets as sources and propagate them, just placing padding around them

 

It's a real problem IMO and has to make it hard for journalists to do a serious, credible job. 

 

Nothing new perhaps, but the point remains: when Platform A has standards, and Platform B does not, it makes it hard for Platform A to compete.

 

It's been (sadly) a staple for a long time that it's better to be the first to break news, regardless of fact vs fiction.

The instant information era has only magnified the problem.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

That is how information and news is disseminated today which is part of the reason why print media as an industry is struggling.

Then I have no idea how I stay informed since I'm not on twitter.  ;)

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Not convicted of rape.

 

But convicted and a rapist, so...yes.

So if your hero Tom Brady has been convicted of a traffic violation then he is a convicted douche bag cheater?  Because he would be convicted, a douche bag, and a cheater.

 

Look, I'm sorry to use your favorite team to illustrate but words have meanings.  TG did not call CB "convicted and a rapist". He called him a "convicted rapist".  Regardless of how vile CB and his actions were, TG was wrong and opened himself up to being sued.  Maybe he should have just mocked VCs looks or golf game if he wanted to publicly douche it up.  He chose poorly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, K-9 said:

Especially disinformation and fake news.

 

IMO, one of the other reasons print media is struggling is that it's held to certain legal and ethical standards whereas twitter and facebook aren't held to any standard at all. And it's hard to compete against that when people have grown so comfortable with just hearing what they want to hear. 

There is truth to that.  But social media has links to reputable sources of information  as well.  You just have to know who they are.   The issue with that is those sources who are not reputable spend a lot of their time attempting to cast legit sources as untrue to muddy the water.

Edited by purple haze
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, purple haze said:

There is truth to that.  But social media has links to reputable sources of information  as well.  You just have to know who they are.   The issue with that is those sources who are not reputable spend a lot of their time attempting to cast legit sources as untrue to muddy the water.

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

Eh, that's not my style.  I'll drive 50 miles just to vote "undecided."

okay I laughed pretty hard right here

16 minutes ago, K-9 said:

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

some do not see it quite as clearly. The equation as it can and does occur.
Without turning this into a history lesson that repeats itself. This is a proven dangerous series of events to influence the broader audiences perspective.
This event has also been described as  "propaganda " some folks are immune to that reality.

 Folks need to be disciplined in how they filter the barrage is the best we can do.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, K-9 said:

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

Of course they did...  Which brings me to the other part of source vetting.  Some folks just don't care and are willing to be purposely misled.  People make mistakes.  Journalists can get info wrong at times.  That's different than a "news" outlet intentionally spreading misinformation.   We are definitely in dangerous times and that includes those who   buy into the propaganda machine out of petulance or other reasons.  Eventually that machine, unchecked, will eat them too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I don't want to get all political here, but WTF is "The Biscuit?"

 

Isn't it the space between your nuts and your bunghole?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...