Re: Whether Adron calls articles biased

[quasi-modo]

Adron, whenever we post links to things that are in our favor you say it is biased... like the links you provide are not.

If you post links to articles by an association of gun owners (NRA) or something similar, I'll say it's biased. If you post links to some .gov site like FBI or to other organizations that don't proclaim a strong standpoint for or against guns I won't say they're biased.

I did not post in the gun debate, but I am talking about in general. You have called other people's stuff biased on other occasions.

[Adron]

I did not post in the gun debate, but I am talking about in general. You have called other people's stuff biased on other occasions.

Well, pick a case and I'll tell you why I thought it was biased, and what I would've considered unbiased.

[quasi-modo]

ugh now you are going to make me scour the forums.

[Hazard]

ugh now you are going to make me scour the forums.

Don't bother, it's pointless.

Adron never offers biased proof for anything, because he never bothers to offer any proof at all. Biased or unbiased, he offers no facts or figures to support anything that he says. Sure he might say "It is factual" or "It is a fact that" but never provides any information about where he came across these so-called facts. In the entire debate on gun control I don't think he offered any actual evidence to speak of about his opinion, just his own "logical analysis" of the situation.

[muert0]

This seems like factual information:
http://forum.valhallalegends.com/phpbbs/index.php?topic=9307.msg86909#msg86909

[Adron]

Don't bother, it's pointless.

Adron never offers biased proof for anything, because he never bothers to offer any proof at all. Biased or unbiased, he offers no facts or figures to support anything that he says. Sure he might say "It is factual" or "It is a fact that" but never provides any information about where he came across these so-called facts. In the entire debate on gun control I don't think he offered any actual evidence to speak of about his opinion, just his own "logical analysis" of the situation.

He's searching for cases where I dismissed data as biased, not cases where I presented biased data.

I try never to offer biased data for anything yes. I have posted data from some UN page, and possibly from some FBI page. I base most of what I say on my own logical analysis of what unbiased and biased data I find. Just repeating someone else's biased arguments would be pretty dumb. I hope that's not what you're doing?

[quasi-modo]

I am not actually searching the forums yet 

Oh here is one that I remember: We were talking about palestinians. I posted a link to an interview with an official from the Israeli Media Watch. You called that video biased because the website was run by the christian group... I think that was your reason, It might have been because the guy is israeli... but you said that was biased when it was a man in an israeli government office.

[Adron]

I am not actually searching the forums yet 

Oh here is one that I remember: We were talking about palestinians. I posted a link to an interview with an official from the Israely Media Watch. You called that video biased because the website was run by the christian group... I think that was your reason, It might have been because the guy is israely... but you said that was biased when it was a man in an Israely government office.

Hmmyes, that one. Israel and the palestinians are parts in the conflict. Publications by the palestinian or israeli governments, that don't just concern hard facts (counts of people killed etc) are things I distrust a bit. I don't think the israeli government is above presenting things in whatever way will further their interests the most (propaganda). I don't doubt that what they showed in that program was actually screened in some palestinian channel, but I could see them picking out the worst 30 minutes from a year of programs.

This could've been solved by having the video presented by some other part that seems more neutral. As it was now, I didn't like the fact that the video was hosted on a site that seemed very strongly christian. I somewhat distrust religious people, of all kinds.

If it had been aired on some larger tv channel, I would've felt more assured that someone else had checked the facts of the program and made sure that it wasn't too strongly biased by the israeli government. For example, if BBC had aired it, that would've been a good thing - either they'd checked it carefully beforehand and ensured it wasn't too biased, or if not, someone else in the wide audience watching BBC would've reacted to seeing it.

[quasi-modo]

But the thing about it was: this is not a video that is being played to masses in Israel. It is an Israeli man, in a position where he has to parse the palestinian media, and he was telling of his findings. Why should he spin when he is talking to an audiance that is rather small and in favor of israel. World opinion of israel is in the crapper, I do not think we even give them the support they need. The un is pissing on them constantly. I do not think any other station would be willing to air something like this. Also because it implys that it is a problem with the faith of palestinians. You have to look past the elite media to get some meat, because the elite media seems to just want to go after what gets ratings. I think the closest major station that would air this would be fox, but you would call that biased too.

[Adron]

But the thing about it was: this is not a video that is being played to masses in Israel. It is an Israeli man, in a position where he has to parse the palestinian media, and he was telling of his findings. Why should he spin when he is talking to an audiance that is rather small and in favor of israel. World opinion of israel is in the crapper, I do not think we even give them the support they need. The un is pissing on them constantly. I do not think any other station would be willing to air something like this. Also because it implys that it is a problem with the faith of palestinians. You have to look past the elite media to get some meat, because the elite media seems to just want to go after what gets ratings. I think the closest major station that would air this would be fox, but you would call that biased too.

What I'd like to ask is: Who is he talking to and why is he talking?

If he's a scientist wanting to share scientistical data, I'd agree with you, but I don't think those will typically make a tv program about it. IIRC, I asked if there was some scientifical report with more figures in it at the time you posted this?

You're saying he's talking to a small audience who is in favor of israel - perhaps this is a movie created to show to people of a cult of israel supporters, helping build/maintain the conviction that palestinians are evil? Some of the program sounded like "propaganda" (not sure if that's the right word) I've seen. A quick search brought up this, an article about witchcraft. Who was it written for? A small audience, presumably already in favor of Jehova. It seems to imply that there are evil people out there practising witchcraft, that can hurt you. Do I trust it? No. But then, I don't believe in witchcraft at all, so maybe this was a stupid example.

[Zakath]

I think the closest major station that would air this would be fox, but you would call that biased too.

FOX is owned by Rupert Murdoch. I certainly wouldn't trust that man farther than I could throw him.

[quasi-modo]

But the thing about it was: this is not a video that is being played to masses in Israel. It is an Israeli man, in a position where he has to parse the palestinian media, and he was telling of his findings. Why should he spin when he is talking to an audiance that is rather small and in favor of israel. World opinion of israel is in the crapper, I do not think we even give them the support they need. The un is pissing on them constantly. I do not think any other station would be willing to air something like this. Also because it implys that it is a problem with the faith of palestinians. You have to look past the elite media to get some meat, because the elite media seems to just want to go after what gets ratings. I think the closest major station that would air this would be fox, but you would call that biased too.

What I'd like to ask is: Who is he talking to and why is he talking?

If he's a scientist wanting to share scientistical data, I'd agree with you, but I don't think those will typically make a tv program about it. IIRC, I asked if there was some scientifical report with more figures in it at the time you posted this?

You're saying he's talking to a small audience who is in favor of israel - perhaps this is a movie created to show to people of a cult of israel supporters, helping build/maintain the conviction that palestinians are evil? Some of the program sounded like "propaganda" (not sure if that's the right word) I've seen. A quick search brought up this, an article about witchcraft. Who was it written for? A small audience, presumably already in favor of Jehova. It seems to imply that there are evil people out there practising witchcraft, that can hurt you. Do I trust it? No. But then, I don't believe in witchcraft at all, so maybe this was a stupid example.

The guys job is to dysect the palestinian media. To know their society. I would call the guy an expert though. He is in this reporting what he is reporting to the government: For example, he uses that news paper clipping about the kids soccer game, he will report to his superiors about what we saw in the video (the soccer game to refresh your memory is for the such and such cup where such and such was a suicide bomber that killed several jews on passover). His job is not to spin data that he finds, simply to gather it and analize it. This is what the guy comes up with.

The guy is talking to the camera of zola levitt... he is the guy who asked to get an interview.

[Adron]

Edit: Also found this http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@DocID=244.html  <-- a site even Dick Cheney can approve (he tried).

This might qualify as unbiased. From looking around on the site, it seems like an externally funded research organization?

[Adron]

The guys job is to dysect the palestinian media. To know their society. I would call the guy an expert though. He is in this reporting what he is reporting to the government: For example, he uses that news paper clipping about the kids soccer game, he will report to his superiors about what we saw in the video (the soccer game to refresh your memory is for the such and such cup where such and such was a suicide bomber that killed several jews on passover). His job is not to spin data that he finds, simply to gather it and analize it. This is what the guy comes up with.

The guy is talking to the camera of zola levitt... he is the guy who asked to get an interview.

Yes, I remember that soccer game, named after someone who is a hero to the palestinians and a criminal to the israeli.

What's the job description of that israeli guy? To analyze palestinian broadcasts, looking for signs that they want peace? To analyze palestinian media looking for threats to israel? I would expect him to gather as much evidence against the palestinians as he can. Not to say there's anything wrong about that. I'd just like to know how much of that that he's finding, which was never specified in the program.

Zola Levitt is that guy I don't trust, the one with the religious site in support of the sionist state. I would expect him to put as much spin on the program as he can. I think religious "leaders" often do that. As I tried to argue recently in another thread, painting the picture of a common demonic enemy is one way of uniting people.

[quasi-modo]

The guys job descritpion is to analize the state of the non-jewish population in Israel. They read all of the papers and prepare reports and charts about what is going on in the non jew world of israel. Mainly they focus on the arabs or palestinians.