[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Not if one of the chosen few starts it .

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

You post is insane, though you should be expert upon the subject of baiting. I have not noticed one comment from you about the actual fact of the crime, nor the circumstances surrounding it, just posts which criticise other posts.

I do not care about your views, on my posts, Jihadwatch, or ANYTHING else - though I respect your right to post them.

Cant even remember the last time i made a thread in serious debates, and I'm sure it wasn't baity. The 'I know you are but what am I' argument doesnt really work well here.

I dont think theres a debate in the crime, I think everyone acknowledges its disgusting and therefore theres not much point repeating what others have said.. The debate, for me, lies in the inappropriate title, the hilarious 'source', and whether this is just a way to spread hatred and bait people into arguments. So that is what I have commented on.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

just have a trawl through some Kizzy posts at your leisure as she has used it twice maybe 3 times recently.

Get me a link of her using the source for a thread idea where the title is as dumb as this one and then we can discuss whether jihadwatch.org and the canary uses similar tactics to spread hatred towards a specific group of people. Otherwise youre just making silly comparisons to prove a point that doesnt exist.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Withano

Get me a link of her using the source for a thread idea where the title is as dumb as this one and then we can discuss whether jihadwatch.org and the canary uses similar tactics to spread hatred towards a specific group of people. Otherwise youre just making silly comparisons to prove a point that doesnt exist.

As if by magic


an example appeared



One small English town just sent a giant ***** you to the UK’s xenophobic media

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/11/24/o...ophobic-media/

[Withano]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

As if by magic


an example appeared



One small English town just sent a giant ***** you to the UK’s xenophobic media

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/11/24/o...ophobic-media/

Is this an example of why the Canary is just as dumb as Jihadwatch? I was more asking for the link to the thread with a silly title on TiBB, that was the point you were making?

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Withano

Is this an example of why the Canary is just as dumb as Jihadwatch? I was more asking for the link to the thread with a silly title on TiBB, that was the point you were making?

no, i made my point about the canary not getting picked up by "certain" members

quite well i think too

[Withano]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

no, i made my point about the canary not getting picked up by "certain" members

quite well i think too

Well, how can you expect people to react in the same way to The Canary as they have to Jihadwatch if nobody has ever made a thread using this as their main source.

Furthermore, they're not even directly comparable. One is media for leftwing readers, the other has a clear motive to incite racial hatred and reports on nothing else.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well, how can you expect people to react in the same way to The Canary as they have to Jihadwatch if nobody has ever made a thread using this as their main source.

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...185&highlight=

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...185&highlight=

THE CHARGE OF THE (544 )LIGHT BRIGADE
Half a league half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six :
'Forward, the Light Brigade!
Charge for the guns' he said:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...185&highlight=

I mean, the source is multitudes greater than Jihadwatch.org, and the title wasnt baity at all. I think youre trying very hard to make the comparison but its just really not here.

But considering you think theyre good comparisons, is your argument that both threads are stupid or both threads are fine?

For me, this thread is more comparable to somebody making a thread called 'ARE BRITISH PATRIOTS KILLING KITTENS FOR FUN?' Using letsexterminatebrits.com as their source. I can personally guarantee you I would react similarly to what I have done here if somebody was daft enough to create something like this.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well, how can you expect people to react in the same way to The Canary as they have to Jihadwatch if nobody has ever made a thread using this as their main source.

Furthermore, they're not even directly comparable. One is media for leftwing readers, the other has a clear motive to incite racial hatred and reports on nothing else.

BUT - the emboldened is OPINION Withano, NOT FACT, and I think that your failure not to to be able to recognise this difference is your problem.

In the OPINION of TENS of MILLIONS of people in this country, Jihadwatch is a relevant site which reports the TRUTH in news articles which DO NOT usually get published in the mainstream media because of Political Correctness.

It is YOUR OPINION, that it has a 'clear motive to incite racial hatred and reports on nothing else' - and that's fine, but it is an opinion, nothing else, and certainly not a fact.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

[/B]

BUT - the emboldened is OPINION Withano, NOT FACT, and I think that your failure not to to be able to recognise this difference is your problem.

In the OPINION of TENS of MILLIONS of people in this country, Jihadwatch is a relevant site which reports the TRUTH in news articles which DO NOT usually get published in the mainstream media because of Political Correctness.

It is YOUR OPINION, that it has a 'clear motive to incite racial hatred and reports on nothing else' - and that's fine, but it is an opinion, nothing else, and certainly not a fact.

Ahahahhahahahha as if you believe this.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

[/B]

BUT - the emboldened is OPINION Withano, NOT FACT, and I think that your failure not to to be able to recognise this difference is your problem.

In the OPINION of TENS of MILLIONS of people in this country, Jihadwatch is a relevant site which reports the TRUTH in news articles which DO NOT usually get published in the mainstream media because of Political Correctness.

It is YOUR OPINION, that it has a 'clear motive to incite racial hatred and reports on nothing else' - and that's fine, but it is an opinion, nothing else, and certainly not a fact.

All media should be scrutinized. Mainstream is just more often than not a safer bet because of the fact that they have the resources and manpower to cover stories... plus the high brand visibility and bigger heights can make them more vulnerable to bad press. (but also just as if not more prone to special interests)

Jihadwatch does seem like a pretty baity name... but this from their about page (Disclaimer: I am sleep deprived so haven't read that entire page... I can't comb through that right now )

Why Jihad Watch?

Why Jihad Watch? Because non-Muslims in the West, as well as in India, China, Russia, and the world over, are facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy their societies and impose Islamic law upon them — and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/why-jihad-watch

So basically they are a special interest blog and they may have access to sources (or know better how to comb for stories of this type) either via translator or just old fashioned Google. I know in the case of Japan at least.. I often have to read direct from the source (natively) because English media is largely oblivious to a lot of the smaller/fact-based developments there... when the Touhoku tsunami/nuclear disaster occurred, I had to rely on Japanese sources for up to date information... and there was a lot going on that could've affected us all... the newspapers were releasing facts/sensor/data by the minute and it was increasingly obvious the government was downplaying the disaster despite the hydrogen explosions... whereas it took like 24 hours for English to pick up and most of that detail was in a few paragraphs. They were more focused on circumstances... you couldn't get the status of the reactors through English media. Not reliably anyway.

Anyway, this thread... the article title is click-baity and is not established fact (where is the source?)... so yeah. Clickbait titles are a sad reality of the net. Sites are losing revenue massively thanks to Facebook and other social media more or less supplementing their daily diet... so they do all the tricks now to keep in the revenue. I try to support those sites by turning off adblock by clicking the links in Twitter. Every bit counts.

Jihadwatch would not be on my reader's digest I know the world has gone crazy... though I am curious to hear why people follow such sites and what they have to gain from them, just from their personal situation.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Maru

All media should be scrutinized. Mainstream is just more often than not a safer bet because of the fact that they have the resources and manpower to cover stories... plus the high brand visibility and bigger heights can make them more vulnerable to bad press. (but also just as if not more prone to special interests)

Jihadwatch does seem like a pretty baity name... but this from their about page (Disclaimer: I am sleep deprived so haven't read that entire page... I can't comb through that right now )



So basically they are a special interest blog and they may have access to sources (or know better how to comb for stories of this type) either via translator or just old fashioned Google. I know in the case of Japan at least.. I often have to read direct from the source (natively) because English media is largely oblivious to a lot of the smaller/fact-based developments there... when the Touhoku tsunami/nuclear disaster occurred, I had to rely on Japanese sources for up to date information... and there was a lot going on that could've affected us all... the newspapers were releasing facts/sensor/data by the minute and it was increasingly obvious the government was downplaying the disaster despite the hydrogen explosions... whereas it took like 24 hours for English to pick up and most of that detail was in a few paragraphs. They were more focused on circumstances... you couldn't get the status of the reactors through English media. Not reliably anyway.

Anyway, this thread... the article title is click-baity and is not established fact (where is the source?)... so yeah. Clickbait titles are a sad reality of the net. Sites are losing revenue massively thanks to Facebook and other social media more or less supplementing their daily diet... so they do all the tricks now to keep in the revenue. I try to support those sites by turning off adblock by clicking the links in Twitter. Every bit counts.

Jihadwatch would not be on my reader's digest I know the world has gone crazy... though I am curious to hear why people follow such sites and what they have to gain from them, just from their personal situation.

You don't advocate it and yet you chose to link to it? That's confusing.