Re: The bold and repeated lying
Seriously. It's fucking ridiculous how dumb shits will claim that the mainstream media is a complete lie, and how they don't believe anything that's broadcast, but they'll take the word of some dumb fuck with a blog as biblical scripture, despite being unable to list any of their qualifications and verify them.
They only acid test these shitheads give on their sources is if they agree with their point of view or not, and that's it, no real counter arguments or comments from the other side. Probably because their argument would come apart at the seams if they didn't selectively pick and choose the shit that supports their argument, rather than trying to show the bigger picture. That and the fact that cutting and pasting a link is a lot easier than actually showing some critical thinking and tries to pass off the illusion that they're smart for posting that link, when it's really lazy fucking thinking. I'm betting that they couldn't effectively summarize half the bullshit posted when they pull this garbage.
That's not to say that the mainstream media doesn't distort things from time to time, they do it, and it will happen again. However, each one of these media organizations that are taking the business serious have checks and balances that keep them from doing this all the time and have journalistic standards and codes of conduct that they agree to - which is way more than the blogs that have been posted are doing. Do they get perverted by less scrupulous organizations, but they can get called out by their own.
I've done work in publishing before - I've seen stories and articles get turned down and rejected because not enough data was verified or too much speculation was in the work. What kind of check and/or balance do any of these articles have or journalistic affiliations do half these links have? Probably none.