- Banned
- #1,176
What does that mean?Alt-light.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What does that mean?Alt-light.
What does that mean?
Is this your way of saying you've got no idea what you're talking about?Someone that has a lightbulb moment after drinking mushroom tea.
Is this your way of saying you've got no idea what you're talking about?
Just keep guessing?No. You sound lonely, are you ok?
Who cares. A slight fudge as a * you.If you watch the video it wasn't about vaccines. CNN repeatedly claimed Rogan took a "horse dewormer" when he actually took Stromectol that was prescribed to him by a doctor. Brand is asking why a news organisation would take such a stance.
Imagine being a company and seeing your product on this nazi campaigner's show.
Im sure you'l find a product rebranding to cry about soon.I think they would be delighted at how many snowflakes are watching.
That's not the way a news organisation should operate.Who cares. A slight fudge as a fu** you.
That's not the way a news organisation should operate.
It's a matter of factual accuracy vs inaccuracy.Out of all the ways corporate media like CNN frames and distorts, who gives a fu** about their snide remark about Rogan.
If indiscretions from news orgs were ranked, this would be bottom 1%.It's a matter of factual accuracy vs inaccuracy.
A news organisation certainly shouldn't be doing "a slight fudge" as part of some petty smear campaign.
That's not an argument in defence of CNN.If indiscretions from news orgs were ranked, this would be bottom 1%.
As I said, who gives a fu**.
Meh. If people focus on this as an example of media bias rather than the litany of substantive things that corporate news contort and frame, have at it.That's not an argument in defence of CNN.
You sound like a Trump fan who can't defend his malfeasance so simply insists it doesn't matter.
Again, that's not a defence of CNN.Meh. If people focus on this as an example of media bias rather than the litany of substantive things that corporate news contort and frame, have at it.
It's tabloid sh*t fight.
Again, that's not a defence of CNN.
Joe Rogan claims CNN misled its audience in an attempt to make him appear ridiculous. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Rogan but his complaint against CNN seems legitimate in this instance.
You don't appear to disagree. You're saying only that it doesn't matter, which really has nothing to do with the facts.
I feel like my previous post covers this.It’s just…so what. Maybe it’s a lie, maybe it’s them not knowing, maybe it’s them having a dig.
They’re a corporate media org that has assumed an anti Trump posture as a marketing exercise. They di worse everyday
I feel like my previous post covers this.
The point is that Rogan appears to be making a valid criticism in this instance.
Your response is "so what?"
That's not really an argument either way.
That's a separate question.Do you think Ivermectin works against covid?
That's a separate question.
I think it's perfectly legitimate to present the evidence (or lack of evidence) on that point. If CNN had stuck to that, they'd be on solid ground.
Again, that's not the issue.Yes, it's a question.
Joe Rogan has been promoting it. Do you think that might be why CNN took the piss out of him?
Again, that's not the issue.
CNN is being criticised for claiming invermectin is a horse dewormer when it's in fact an anti-parasitic agent that can be prescribed for humans. That's simply a fact.
By all means, question its efficacy as a treatment for coronavirus. But to describe it as a horse dewormer, when it can be prescribed for humans, is misleading. That's the criticism. And even Sanjay Gupta conceded the point.