seattle

[bcla]

That's just bonkers if it stands correct.

Not 100% sure what the altered photo was supposed to indicate. Maybe that they had armed people standing by to protect people looting businesses?

 

[Heather07438]

Expect to hear the backflips of people side tracking to distract from the point.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

Pretty big difference. The Michigan folks did not expel the police from the area, nor did they erect barriers and declare the area a new country. Seattle is an armed insurrection against our legal government. Seattle is one of the most liberal cities in this country. If these folks can't find their grand liberal utopia there, then they are SOL. The Michigan protesters were not demanding anything other than the lifting of arbitrary restrictions. The Seattle "CHAZ" on the other hand is actually asking for stuff that is not protected in the Bill of Rights. See below for their list of demands.


Yes, because a bunch of armed fools showing up at the state capitol building, where no one goes to anyway, during a pandemic is far more scary than armed fools erecting barriers and taking over a large chunk of downtown Seattle while declaring themselves a new country.

One group just wanted to be able to go back to work and live a normal life without arbitrary restrictions. The other group wants free college, free housing, free healthcare, abolishing the police and jails, and letting out all the prisoners currently in jail. Sounds more like a hostage takers list of demands and not a protest. Did I miss anything here?

From what I saw, the Michigan protesters never met any type of resistance. Why would they have felt they needed to overtake the building, when It appeared they already owned the place?

I really don't know what to say to people who don't see the difference in the response the Michigan protesters received from some Americans verses the response other protesters have received from the same people.

everybody agrees that it is ok to legally protest armed. I am still waiting for someone to tell me how this whole seattle thing is legal. that's all. so if what they are doing is legal. I have no problem with it. I don't see any hypocrisy in that.

I disagree that everybody thinks it's okay to legally protest armed. I find all armed protests abhorrent. IMO, those showing up armed exhibit the worst of Americans. That type of protest can only make matters worse. Personally, I think we'd all be better off, if that type of behavior was illegal in this country.

Looks like Fox was busted for faking pictures of the protest zone....

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...attles-protests-capitol-hill-autonomous-zone/
From the article....

Fox News published digitally altered and misleading photos on stories about Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) in what photojournalism experts called a clear violation of ethical standards for news organizations.

lol. That explains why some of us aren't seeing the same things others are.

 

[lorimay]

lol. That explains why some of us aren't seeing the same things others are.
[/QUOTE]

I cannot believe that it is legal for a News Organization to run a story and show images that are digitally altered and scare people like this. They totally fabricated what was happening in Seattle.
If it is legal, it should be made illegal immediately.

 

[NYCgrrl]

lol. That explains why some of us aren't seeing the same things others are.

I cannot believe that it is legal for a News Organization to run a story and show images that are digitally altered and scare people like this. They totally fabricated what was happening in Seattle.
If it is legal, it should be made illegal immediately.
[/QUOTE]
It's not illegal but it is unethical according to most professional journalism groups. If it were illegal publications like the Star and National Enquirer would have been out of business decades ago, LOL.
All newpapers and stations make mistakes at time but how they correct the error tells a lot about their journalistic integrity to my way of thinking.

 

[MillauFr]

It's not illegal but it is unethical according to most professional journalism groups. If it were illegal publications like the Star and National Enquirer would have been out of business decades ago, LOL.
All newpapers and stations make mistakes at time but how they correct the error tells a lot about their journalistic integrity to my way of thinking.

Unfortunately people don't want news. They want to be entertained. I'm sure the highest rated programs on Fox News are the talking heads who could care less about reporting news. They will say whatever it takes to get high ratings. If research showed they could boost profits 10% by shifting their programming to a more liberal bent they would do so in a NY second. They don't care about red or blue. They just care about green.

 

[penn19]

I watch both CNN and Fox. And local news also just to see what’s going on. I think it’s scummy to photoshop. Especially to fit a narrative.
I think ALL news organizations report the news to fit their narrative.

 

[Heather07438]

The sad thing about the altered images... it doesn't matter that it gets corrected because the psychological warfare already did its thing.

 

[JimMIA]

It's not illegal but it is unethical according to most professional journalism groups. If it were illegal publications like the Star and National Enquirer would have been out of business decades ago, LOL.
All newpapers and stations make mistakes at time but how they correct the error tells a lot about their journalistic integrity to my way of thinking.

Agree, but I strongly suspect that a big majority of the "mistakes" are not mistakes until they are caught.

News media across the spectrum of political agendas twist and distort the "facts" to make the story read to match their agenda.

 

[bcla]

I cannot believe that it is legal for a News Organization to run a story and show images that are digitally altered and scare people like this. They totally fabricated what was happening in Seattle.
If it is legal, it should be made illegal immediately.

The claim is that it was innocent, but it sure looked to me as if they were trying to make it seem that their armed people were standing guard for the looters. That's clearly the message they were trying to convey.

 

[okeydokey]

lol. That explains why some of us aren't seeing the same things others are.

I cannot believe that it is legal for a News Organization to run a story and show images that are digitally altered and scare people like this. They totally fabricated what was happening in Seattle.
If it is legal, it should be made illegal immediately.
[/QUOTE]
They are not a news agency, they just pretend to be one.

 

[okeydokey]

Agree, but I strongly suspect that a big majority of the "mistakes" are not mistakes until they are caught.

News media across the spectrum of political agendas twist and distort the "facts" to make the story read to match their agenda.

They digitally inserted altered images into their publication. This is not just "twisting" the facts. It's abhorrent.

They can't claim it was innocent. They didn't just accidentally slip and oopsey here are some images we inserted into our photos.

 

[NYCgrrl]

Unfortunately people don't want news. They want to be entertained. I'm sure the highest rated programs on Fox News are the talking heads who could care less about reporting news. They will say whatever it takes to get high ratings. If research showed they could boost profits 10% by shifting their programming to a more liberal bent they would do so in a NY second. They don't care about red or blue. They just care about green.

This on soooooo many truly sad levels.
And yes the highest rated shows on Fox are the opinion pieces. They can say and do what they want with no pesky journalistic guidelines to get in the way. Probably true of CNN and MSNBC as well.
I do not depend on any of them or internet only sites for my regular news.

 

[JimMIA]

They are not a news agency, they just pretend to be one.

They digitally inserted altered images into their publication. This is not just "twisting" the facts. It's abhorrent.

I agree with you, and Fox is not alone. All cable news is nothing but a political performance, IMHO.

They all play fast and loose not only with "facts," but also with altered photos, distorted video, and every other type of manipulation they can think of. Journalistic ethics died decades ago.

Millaurfr is right above -- it's all about the money now.

I only watch Fox, MSNBC, and CNN for comic relief. And that's their "news" programming. I can't stand any of their opinion performers.

I think if someone really wants to know what's going on, we have to look at a wide variety of news sources, including outlets from other countries.

 

[lorimay]

I agree with you, and Fox is not alone. All cable news is nothing but a political performance, IMHO.

They all play fast and loose not only with "facts," but also with altered photos, distorted video, and every other type of manipulation they can think of. Journalistic ethics died decades ago.

Millaurfr is right above -- it's all about the money now.

I only watch Fox, MSNBC, and CNN for comic relief. And that's their "news" programming. I can't stand any of their opinion performers.

I think if someone really wants to know what's going on, we have to look at a wide variety of news sources, including outlets from other countries.

Have you seen any other New Organizations being called out for digitally altering pictures?
Because I have not.

 

[JimMIA]

Have you seen any other New Organizations being called out for digitally altering pictures?
Because I have not.

"Called out?" LOL, no. And if I did see that, I'd ignore it.

They all do it and they all complain about each other doing it.

 

[Heather07438]

They knew they'd be caught, didn't matter because it served its purpose of swaying public opinion.
What standards do we deserve for the things we are willing to shrug off.

 

[lorimay]

"Called out?" LOL, no. And if I did see that, I'd ignore it.

They all do it and they all complain about each other doing it.

Well I wouldn't ignore a credible newspaper that writes a story about a News Organization reporting out and out lies about their community.
They reported violence, armed men, theft and destruction and it was not true. I am sorry but that is inexcusable as far as I'm concerned. There is nothing funny or amusing about it.
Again, I have not seen this happen with another network.
They DO NOT all do it.

 

[NYCgrrl]

Well I wouldn't ignore a credible newspaper that writes a story about a News Organization reporting out and out lies about their community.
They reported violence, armed men, theft and destruction and it was not true. I am sorry but that is inexcusable as far as I'm concerned. There is nothing funny or amusing about it.
Again, I have not seen this happen with another network.
They DO NOT all do it.

Yeah it does seem that they were purposefully creating a story that fit the narrative they wanted. It would have been quite simple to note the pictures were composites and write the story from there which of course is not what they did.

There are definitely American news gathering organizations of different political stripes I read and watch of worth just as there are international ones.
I won't knowingly be pandered to though.

 

[MillauFr]

I think ALL news organizations report the news to fit their narrative.

There is a huge difference though between the National Inquirer and hard news sites like C-Span, AP, and Reuters.