Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
koolaid.. it's not just for dinner.
for all this blab, you didn't really talk about the very real fact there IS a senate investigation and this WAS their findings.
|
You aren't seeing the trees for the forrest..
The news can be accurate, but still presented in a biased way. This is what I was stating.
Do you not agree that Fox news is biased in their presentation of news? It's still mostly accurate but they present the news in a distorted manor that favors the right wing and the GOP.
RT.com is exactly the same. They might present accurate news but they present it in a distorted manor that favors what is good for Russia vs by showing nothing but distorted negative reports against the US.
Just because it's what "YOU" want to hear does not mean it's not biased. As I said in the other topic, "EVERY" news agency is biased to what their viewers want to hear. Otherwise they soon would not have any viewers because people don't want to hear what they don't agree with.
example.. on RT.com is this story with headline..
"
Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero"
Really a smear campaign?? They didn't go on some "smear campaign", they gave him a negative review to a future employer. While yes that is actually illegal to do, it is far from as the headline suggests going on a "smear campaign".
It's obviously just a case of bad management and not such a great employee if you read what he did.
Yet RT.com makes it seems like big bad evil US arms sale company tries to ruin medal of honor hero's life. Now obviously they are in the wrong because it's against the law to give a bad review to another employer. However he was fired for a very legit reason.. He disobeyed his employer and was causing problems because he felt they shouldn't be selling arms to Pakistan.
Now ask your self, if you are an employer are you going to keep a employee around that tries to dictate who you can and can't do business with? Obviously not and they had every right to fire him, however they broke the law at the point of giving a future employer a bad review of the guy. Hence the lawsuit.
So while their story might be accurate in some terms it skews the facts trying to shove the reader into an agenda that is set forth right from the headline.
In short they are as biased as they come.