Obamas "Fake News" vs. Trumps "Dishonest Media"

a reply to: Stevemagegod

I think a compromise is in order.

The Democrats need to recognize and admit that they lost because the candidate they put forth was horrible. Clinton was a bad choice.

The Right Wing needs to admit that they're susceptible to news and sources that stroke their confirmation bias and often leaves truth/facts out altogether. Stop being gullible and do a bit of critical thinking.

Deal? Deal.

originally posted by: SouthernGift
The Internet seems to really be a game changer for us all. The elite, as well as those of us using it to try to get to the bottom of this reality we call life. I have never lived in a world without access to google anything I need to know about, so I can't imagine a time where I had to choose a leader of the free world based only on what I heard come out of their mouth during 3 televised debates that I wouldn't even have the technology to record if I wasn't available to watch right then.

Looking forward, I think the new end game for those at the top will be to censor, take control of, or down right do away with the way we create and spread information on the net. They can never fully get rid of it, because it's too much of a way of life... But rest assured if they have their way, there will be a monopoly on the net based info just like on the big media networks. Surprised they let it go on this long, but I think they overestimated the affects of the vaccines and fluoride on our gen!

Trump's appointed two men who are against net neutrality (one is a consultant for Verizon) to oversee the FCC transition - and net neutrality advocates are bracing for a fight.

The Internet of the future will be different - and if these two have their way, you probably won't notice it. It won't affect sites like ATS -- we're 15,700 in stat rankings for the world, 5100 for America. Compare to CNN.com with a site ranking of 83 globally and 15 for America or Wikipedia (6 globally, 5 in America.)

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod

I think a compromise is in order.

The Democrats need to recognize and admit that they lost because the candidate they put forth was horrible. Clinton was a bad choice.

We won the popular vote.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod

I think a compromise is in order.

The Democrats need to recognize and admit that they lost because the candidate they put forth was horrible. Clinton was a bad choice.

We won the popular vote.

I know, but it's an empty win because she did not take the WH.

I need to do some further reading on this... Thank you for the info...
I used to work in marketing a little bit in 08-09 so I know a tiny bit about Google rankings and all that but me and my father (who is a programmer/web developer) always thought there was some missing link we couldn't figure out about how to ultimately get traffic. Dad always said those at the top pay to be at the top. If that's the case I can see why all he big media is naturally ranked so high, even if they aren't getting the most traffic. Money talks. But, I really know nothing about this subject in comparison to the great minds I've seen post here.

reply to: Byrd

originally posted by: SouthernGift
I need to do some further reading on this... Thank you for the info...
I used to work in marketing a little bit in 08-09 so I know a tiny bit about Google rankings and all that but me and my father (who is a programmer/web developer) always thought there was some missing link we couldn't figure out about how to ultimately get traffic. Dad always said those at the top pay to be at the top.

Two different things, actually. One is based on pay-per click but that's different than actual traffic and showing up first in a search engine (well, a lot of different things, including how the consumer configures their browser by their cookie history.)

If that's the case I can see why all he big media is naturally ranked so high, even if they aren't getting the most traffic.

Actually, they ARE getting that much traffic. People want information and people share information (all those stories on Facebook... and many folks click on them, for instance.) Did you click on the links I put to check the stories (you should have) -- that's several more clicks for those sites (my click and your click and other folks who wanted to verify my information)

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod

I think a compromise is in order.

The Democrats need to recognize and admit that they lost because the candidate they put forth was horrible. Clinton was a bad choice.

The Right Wing needs to admit that they're susceptible to news and sources that stroke their confirmation bias and often leaves truth/facts out altogether. Stop being gullible and do a bit of critical thinking.

Deal? Deal.

I can accept that Deal

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod

I think a compromise is in order.

The Democrats need to recognize and admit that they lost because the candidate they put forth was horrible. Clinton was a bad choice.

We won the popular vote.

So just like Introvert said its a empty win. You guys going to start a Civil War over the electoral college and succeed from the Great United States? O wait never mind you guys are trying to do just that with #Caliexit. You guys do realize that if California succeeds Hillary will lose all the votes she gained in California and thus giving Trump the Popular Vote win right?

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: kurthall

Part time, low wage jobs...what a win!

So you prefer more jobs for bankers and such other like people who came from wealthy or otherwise very well faring families and expensive educations to get a priority.

Job shortage and financial problems mostly exist at the bottom of society and are a lot more pressing. I am happy to see a president providing minimum wage earners with jobs instead of one manipulating the numbers to make it seem so.

I am glad you did not become our president.

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: kurthall

Part time, low wage jobs...what a win!

So you prefer more jobs for bankers and such other like people who came from wealthy or otherwise very well faring families and expensive educations to get a priority.

Job shortage and financial problems mostly exist at the bottom of society and are a lot more pressing. I am happy to see a president providing minimum wage earners with jobs instead of one manipulating the numbers to make it seem so.

I am glad you did not become our president.

financial problems exist at every level of Society. Not just poor people. Sorry I had to clarify your statement.

a reply to: Stevemagegod


Of course but when people who work at the bottom of the food chain lose their jobs it is a whole lot more critical. They will run out of food within a week and are more likely to need to apply for welfare in the likelihood that they cant just find another job.

A surgeon won't be starving any time soon if he loses his job and will have a richer environment of friends and connections to help get a new job and support him financially or any which way if that is necessary. It simply is a lot more critical for people at the minimum wage line, they then have no job, no savings because they never make enough to save anything up and no wealthy social and well connected network to help them out.

originally posted by: Stevemagegod

originally posted by: butcherguy
Hey Hillary!

Why didn't you win by 50 points?

Just imagine how badly she would have been beaten if Trump had been something better than an awful candidate!

O s_hit you're right hahahah. I just did the math 306-232=74 points. Trump beat Hillary even in her hypothetical "What Ifs". Hahah that is go recountsld.

www.cnn.com...

Quick, celebrate harder while her cronies (backed by most of the government) ships in pallets of ballots to key counties, and then gets some third party to call for a recount there