search results matching tag: sensationalism

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (7)     Sift Talk (1)     Blogs (1)     Comments (232)   

Chinese "UBER" Commercial -- DIDI

Today Show Canoe

Storm Surge Like You've Never Experienced it Before

SaNdMaN says...

Yes, but in some cases this kind of sensationalism is warranted. Many people don't take hurricanes seriously. "Scaring" them like this could save lives.

cloudballoon said:

Man... BBC's The Bodyguard clips are tame by comparison. US TV... everything must be SENSATIONAL!!! FEAR FEAR FEAR! ... even the weather. Yes, Florence is dangerous, big and wet, but come on... focus!

Storm Surge Like You've Never Experienced it Before

Leftists Will Carry Out Targeted Killings Of Republicans

smr says...

What's tearing this country apart isn't an impending impeachment, it's the crowdsourcing of sensationalism coupled with rampant confirmation bias. We're all intently focused on whatever supports our currently held beliefs and hits us in the feelers with a nice dose of rage/fear. In a country of 300+ million and a world where EVERYTHING is recorded, there are plenty of three sigma outliers and circus barkers for us to entertain ourselves with. The downside is that, like walking to your car after a horror movie, we are influenced by the entertainment, made worse for those of us who buy the line that this is the TRUTH of the world.

Talk to your neighbor. Question a persons method, but never question their motivation.

81 year old American Ninja Warrior

Pushy CNN Reporter Can't Take A Hint

bremnet says...

I think it was right on the rails. I live in Houston, was fortunate to have come through Harvey with little damage, and spent hours helping folks get out of the small boats that were rescuing people from their water filled homes. The reporting from the various news agencies was on TV pretty much 24/7. But they don't get it... sure, people outside of the situation want to know what's going on, but some of the most inane, redundant, pointless and heartless questions in the world come out of the mouths of these reporters who feel they need to just keep on talking. On more than one occasion, we had to tell reporters to get the fuck out of the way so we could do our work instead of pausing to allow them to conduct an interview. In a situation like this, where people have lost EVERYTHING they own except for the clothes they have on, and have spent hours scared, cold and not knowing if anyone is coming to rescue them, how the fuck can anyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size think it's a story that wants to be retold in front of a camera? We helped little kids out of boats, with their parents coming along a few boats behind, and reporters walking up to these shivering, scared kids to ask them about any pets they might have left behind or been unable to rescue - to get them to cry. That's inhuman. If it were me, I would've shoved that microphone down that stupid woman's throat. This isn't reporting, it sensationalizing. But I guess we wouldn't expect less from CNN. These people aren't reporters our journalists, they are pond scum.

Governor of Washington Slams Trumps over Muslim Ban

transmorpher says...

This is the problem with the left in recent times, you're going out of your way to try to prove me wrong, instead of having a dialogue about a solution that helps the most amount of people in a responsible way. And that corners the right wingers into doing stuff like what Trump has done, in fact the far left can be partly blamed for why Trump is the president int he first place.

We've seen what open borders do in Europe. And now we're going to see what closed borders do in the US.

They're both bad solutions.

I expect a lot more from the left, since they are usually smarter and more educated than the right. But it seems that recently they've all opted for sensationalism just like the right.

And now I'm going to get down-voted by both the left and right lol, and no progress will be made.

newtboy said:

EDIT: Expecting a uniform measured response from 100% of a terrorized, decimated, displaced people who've lived a living hell for years, some growing up in it, to a plan that seems to remove any hope of escape to a place where they might live a normal life, an escape they've worked towards for years at great expense and hardship, and in some cases escaping certain death due to helping America....no culture or people on earth are going to live up to that. American's certainly don't. We go off half cocked over 1% of that hardship and fly planes into federal buildings.

...Says the person advocating blaming and ruining the lives of innocent people for the acts of those that attacked and displaced them. Destroying the lives of random innocent people will never make the situation better, it will create more hatred for the US. That's the behavior I'd expect from a racist or Nazi because they're seeing everyone with a certain demographic as terroristic. We don't need more people with intolerant and inflexible attitudes.

I think it's the racism and xenophobia they already had coupled with a sudden influx of "others" that are now in their daily lives that turns them to extremism, because they've been primed to do so by the far right. If it was only a matter of "my feels got hurt" and nothing else, we wouldn't have international outrage at our horribly thought out, disastrously implemented, clearly racially and theologically motivated travel ban, but it hurts far more than feelings, it will kill some people.

HA!!!! All those groups have been labeled terrorists at one time, and all of them have committed terroristic acts. Every. Single. One. You just pulled a Bob and used an example that totally destroys your point.

Read some history, Christian extremism puts Islamic extremism to shame.

Unarmed Man Laying On Ground With Hands in Air Shot

Barbar says...

Absolutely the officer should be charged. I think it's a huge disservice to everybody that these things are so often dealt with behind closed doors. It breeds contempt and distrust, and it eliminates an important opportunity for the public to understand some of the issues inherent in policing, and it seems to let horrible crimes go largely unaddressed.

But 'triple cuffed' can only mean a daisy chain of cuffs. Nothing else makes any sense, and to do so means that they are making some kind of attempt to accommodate the comfort of the individual during the cuffing. Or do you think it means having 3 sets of hand cuffs individually applied to your wrists? Come on... Doesn't excuse the cuffing of the guy, obviously, but thinking that triple cuffing is some heinous extreme version of cuffing is absurd.

You acknowledge that he had bad aim, and that the majority of shots missed the intended target, whichever target that was. You acknowledge that poor leadership, training, and protocol may have contributed to this outcome, but then you make the leap that because these this incompetency, it must have been intentional. It simply doesn't follow. You might ask them to be held responsible, but it doesn't mean it was the intent.

Saying 'I don't know' in the immediate aftermath of a charged situation where you are just coming to realize you made a huge mistake and nearly killed an innocent seems reasonable. It does not mean 'I meant to kill you and missed." It seems to indicate a state of confusion or shock.

I heard absolutely no reference to any time frame, or them preventing medical assistance for more than 15 minutes. I'll just remain agnostic on that angle.

I'm no lawyer, but I would have thought that intent combined with action was the very core of attempted murder. Murder is all about intent, and attempted is all about action. Attempted manslaughter of some degree seems the most realistic charge to make, but that's up to people that better know the law, and are willing to spend hundreds of hours analyzing the situation.

A huge problem with the system is the way that justice is delayed for so long (assuming it is ever meted out). People want instant karma, immediate redress for wrongs committed. People see something, get heated, and feel that a strong reaction is called for in the moment. The system on the other hand is meant to be about dispassionate discussion of the details of the situation, and can take a long time to play out. This is a big part of why it seems so reprehensible when it's carried out behind closed doors; it looks like it's being swept under the carpet. Similarly this is why media coverage over sensationalizes crime. But that's a discussion for another day.

Anyways, I've already typed too much about this I think.

newtboy said:

Well, the level of incompetence required for this to be 'accidental' is SOOO incredibly high that it's not reasonable to assume the police are that incompetent....but if they are, that's intentional on the part of their supervisors, no? So still the responsibility of the police as a whole.

There IS doubt that they could have killed him and made it look unintentional. He shot 3 times, and only hit once. Clearly, he's not a good enough shot to kill on the first shot, because cops ALWAYS shoot to kill, and he failed, no matter which target he was aiming at.

We can assume that because he said "I don't know" when asked why he shot the caregiver....not "I missed", or "I wasn't aiming at you" or any other mitigation. If, as you suggest, he was firing at the sitting, unarmed, severely mentally challenged man (also completely inexcusable, btw) then the negligence in discharging his firearm with an innocent victim between him and the target is not just gross negligence, it's intentional negligence. Shooting someone because you don't care that they are between you and your target makes you an attempted murderer. Period.

Um....if a cop was shot in the foot, medical care would be instant, there would be no handcuffing, much less TRIPPLE handcuffing. What was reported was they didn't call for medical attention for >15 minutes.

That level of incompetence from a police officer MUST, by definition, be intentional. They are well trained and equipped to avoid exactly this kind of fiasco. Ignoring that training is intentional, and that must be prosecutable if there is to be any effect. I don't have to ascribe intent to murder to claim culpability. That is not the metric by which the law is applied. If your actions are grossly negligent and end in near death of another, which is the absolute least criminal possible interpretation of the actions of this officer, that's criminal attempted murder/manslaughter1. Because (inappropriately) using a firearm is not unintentional, and officers ONLY use them to kill, this was not attempted manslaughter, which only applies when the intent is NOT to kill, it was an attempted murder.
Either way, that's a question for a jury to answer, not his superior, not the DA that he works with daily.

Unarmed Man Laying On Ground With Hands in Air Shot

Barbar says...

This is where our views part: I am not ready to ascribe malice to what can be explained by incompetence. I am not willing to do so without something more to go on. I think this sort of sensationalism can be dangerous and polarizing.

There's no doubt that these two cops could have killed the caregiver had they the intent. Even just the cop that fired, had he really wanted to, could have killed the victim, easily. The fact that they did not do so doesn't exonerate them from all wrong doing, but it does stand in the face of your charges of attempted murder.

If three shots were fired, and only one of them hit the victim, why do we assume that he was firing at the caregiver, and not the other fellow? Either way, most shots missed, and we can see the prone man was between the sitting man and the shooting man. Horrible idea to be firing, but to ascribe motive at this point is to get ahead of yourself. Negligence seems more likely.

As for the delay in medical care, there are a lot of assumptions being made it seems. Where was he shot? Was he bleeding profusely? How many of those 15 minutes passed before medics were even on the scene? The cufffing is clearly a bad idea in this case, but also sounds like protocol, which can hardly be maintained constitutes attempted murder.

That is why it is damaging to jump to conclusions early. We can say that the shooting was clearly unjust and unjustified. We can say that the officer clearly acted incompetent in his job, causing significant harm to an innocent. Beyond that you're straying into the mind reading business.

newtboy said:

Yeah, if that's the best they have, and I think its giving him WAY too much credit, it's absolutely no excuse and he should be prosecuted for 3 attempted murders, and his partner(s) should be prosecuted for accessory to attempted murder if not simple attempted murder for not supplying treatment instantly.

If he couldn't tell it was a truck, he clearly couldn't tell if it was a gun, so shouldn't shoot.
If he couldn't hit the intended target, he shouldn't ever shoot.
If he missed the intended target, a mentally challenged boy playing with a non threatening toy sitting down and not moving, with all 3 shots, he should never be allowed to touch a gun ever again.
But, I don't think they were aiming for the boy, I think they hit exactly who they intended to hit, the prone black man with his empty arms outstretched begging "don't shoot". When asked why he shot the unarmed, prone, surrendered, non threatening caregiver, the cop didn't say "I missed", or "I hit the wrong guy" or "I feared for my life" or "I thought I saw a gun" (not that seeing a gun is a reason to shoot, like they seem to think), he said "I don't know".

Under no circumstance was there a reason to shoot in this instance.
Under no circumstance was there a reason to triple handcuff the unarmed, non threatening man they just shot.
Under no circumstance was there a reason to withhold medical treatment for >15 minutes.
This was an attempted murder, not a mistake.

Bill Maher and Colbert - Police Culture has to change

Lawdeedaw says...

There are a few things that do make me laugh at the ignorance though. He hasn't seen any postitive...at all...since the civil rights era...? Okay, little sensationalized...considering *Dash cams *More prosecutions *more black officers (I read one recount how in the 80s the force was so different that only white men could arrest white men in the city, that was probably the funniest example...) *more policies and training against racial bias... Ergo the problem. Mahar doesn't care what the police really do, only the perception of the television plugging points.

dag said:

Quote hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I know Maher is a divisive character but I'll take this kind of talk over the canned movie plugging.

Mark Blyth on Brexit: "revolt against technocracy"

MAKE AMERICA WHITE AGAIN!

Jinx says...

Yeah... our papers... I think the sort of death rattle of print news is this sort of increasing slide to sensationalism. They drop the price, they drop the standards. Honestly, if it wasn't for them I imagine the referendum would have gone the other way. The worse part is that if the Brexit is going to be as bad as some fear then they won't be printing apologies, they'll just doubledown on their junk food narratives.

But anyway. In regards to this video, I think it is quite interesting that even when you are calling to "make America White again" you can still deny racism. I mean, you'd think if you've gone that far you may as well just run with it. But I guess if us Brits are taking notes from the Trump playbook, then I suppose Americans can borrow from Orwell.

ChaosEngine said:

Also, this was a story in a mainstream UK paper today (the Sun). Reproducing it here because I wouldn't give the pricks another click:

WHERE THE BREX WAS WON Streets full of Polish shops, kids not speaking English… but Union Jacks now flying high again
People from Portsmouth, Plymouth and Boston revel in their relief at EU exit
BY BEN GRIFFITHS AND RYAN SABEY 26th June 2016, 2:11 am

VOTERS in Britain’s most Eurosceptic towns spoke of their relief at Brexit saying: “We’re elated.”

The anti-Brussels fervour was greatest in Boston where 75.6 per cent opted for Leave.

Single market too far … a corner shop in Boston, Lincolnshire
One in six of the Lincolnshire town’s 65,000 population are Eastern Europeans — the highest percentage in the UK.

Yesterday a buzz was back in its medieval centre where High Street stores are flanked by Polish and Lithuanian shops. Crosses of St George and Union Jack flags were adorning pubs and homes.

Caterer and mum-of-five Sally Shuttleworth, 58, said: “I’ve never been so elated as when I saw the Brexit result come in.

“Boston is an example of how Britain has lost its identity with all the Polish shops.

“We need tighter border controls. Immigrants are hard workers but there is too much pressure on the system, on schools, and hospitals.

“You could tell by the number of people streaming out of polling stations that the vote meant a lot to the town.”

In January the Boston area was named the most murderous place in England and Wales, with 15 cases per 100,000 people.

It also has the unwanted title of least integrated town in the UK.

Elation … Retired agricultural mechanic Ron Holmes, revealed: “I’m delighted. The whole town is.”
Translators are employed at Park Academy primary school where half the children speak Eastern European languages.

Retired agricultural mechanic Ron Holmes, 69, added: “I’m delighted. The whole town is.

“Whether you think the EU or immigration is right or wrong things have to stop in Boston.

“It is crippling the UK and we had to deal with it once and for all and vote out.

“The EU wasted money on so many things. They should have put the money in places like Latvia and Estonia to build them up so those people would not want to come here. We should never have joined the Common Market in 1975. I remember it well. Now we have finally put it right.”

Variety … the town of Boston has many shops and eateries catering for Polish tastes
Locals yesterday talked of celebratory parties, extra busy pubs and cheering in the streets.

There are around 1,200 people, mostly Brits, out of work in the town and many hope the result might see a change in fortunes.

Jobless Paul Cook, 53, said: “I don’t think people in the South realised how important this vote was to us.

“It is brilliant that we have voted out. We have had enough of the EU telling us what we can and cannot do. Not being able to control who comes in the country is a big problem. Now we can hopefully get a points system that will allow skilled people in.

“I’m hoping it will free up more roles for British-born people.”


There ya go. Racism is now acceptable in public discourse.

Gratefulmom (Member Profile)

Sagemind says...

I agree that you didn't intend to use the click-bait title.
You used the YouTube name - Their title was a click-bait title (unfortunately.)

"British Farmer's Son Shocks Meat Farmer Dad with this video"

---At no point did his son(?), not mentioned in the video, shock his dad.
There was no shocking being done at all. The old guy was not shocked in any way. From the sounds of the poem, the dad wasn't even a meat farmer as he's clearly not a meat eater. Most likely a dairy farmer? It was merely an old guy voicing a cool poem. (which was well done, by the way.) ---

See how the title sensationalizes the video and causes invite to watch a video that clearly doesn't describe the video at all?

Anyway, I was merely inviting you to see the comments already being made, bringing it to your attention.

hoping you have a great day

Gratefulmom said:

I did not intend this as click bait...I am saddened to think it was taken as such

The Most Costly Joke in History

transmorpher says...

You asked if I was a pig some food related thread. And I said yes and posted a picture of me in the Bahamas

I totally agree that the development and costs are ridiculous. I honestly don't care if the plane sucks or not(although I would rather my taxes be wasted on a functional plane at least!), but the reason I'm taking the time to reply is because I think the performance and capability concerns of the plane are unfounded for these reason:


1. Nobody can say for certain what the F-35 is capable of or not capable of. It's all classified. There are simply no facts or data that the public has access to. Anything the public sees is watered down a lot, and I think this is where the majority of confusion is coming from. Not one article I've seen can tell you 1 specific bit of information about why it's a bad plane. Because there is no data. They'll say it's bad, and then start going on about congressional corruption (which is legitimate, but nothing to do with the planes capabilities).

2. The general media does not have an understanding of how air combat really works.

3. Nobody can predict the future, so the media making claims about certain things becoming obsolete is just a guess, and quite often irrelevant. They also seem to ignore the fact the F-35 if it becomes obsolete in 10 years, then so have all of the 40 year old planes. All anyone can do is be prepared for the things they know about, because it's not possible to be prepared for something that you don't know about.

That is the logic I am thinking with anyway. It's sensationalism vs corporate propaganda, and there is no way to tell who is right since there is no data.

newtboy said:

Um...who called you a pig? The voices in your head? Certainly not me. I don't know why you would say you can't be both though. That's just silly. ;-)


That's a pretty big 'If it can' that's already been proven to be an 'it can't'. Even IF it did everything it was supposed to, yes, it's 10 years too late and at least double an acceptable price tag, and still not ready for prime time, or even the 2am slot.
Yes, modification happens, but the idea is not to produce something that needs to be modified out of the box in order to do anything well.
No, many bombers are in use that were designed as bombers. Sorry, but that's just wrong.
Once again, the idea of the F-35 doesn't grant air superiority, neither does a few of these planes, especially if we are too afraid to lose a $200+ million plane so we just don't use them, which is the most likely outcome. It is in NO way a deterrent to full scale war with any foe we might ever use it against, like Russia. If it was some magic anti-war bullet, that might be money well spent, but is simply isn't in any way and NEVER will be, so that argument is just silly.
In 10 years, the stealth properties of this plane will be 5 years past obsolete....and it may STILL not be in the air.
There are no countries with air forces that can come close to ours, not one. I don't think there's even a group of 10 nations combined that come close to ours. We will NEVER be in a fair fight excepting a nuclear one where every one dies, and we'll still out nuke everyone else 10-1, it just won't matter.
Yes, Trump likely would take us to war, that's no reason to waste more money on unneeded weapons for a possible, unknown, unlikely future conflict with an unknown, unestimated enemy.
Still testing....and still testing....and still testing....$1.3 TRILLION later.....Still testing (and failing those tests)....still testing...still testing. Eventually it should be admitted that it's a failure, more testing won't help (it hasn't yet), and quit throwing mountains of good money after bad.
No, it doesn't. It's TASKED with all the same stuff the aging, multi types of planes do, but it can't do it. Stealth is not something new, BTW, we have many stealth planes already, better ones that work.
Again, out of the box needing to be upgraded is a fail. A massive, indisputable fail. That an engine powerful enough to move this pig like other planes already can doesn't exist should tell you something. It's aerodynamic....great....that's one part of a dozen that have to fit together.
The price tag is multiplied 10 fold because it has a pilot.
You want them to eventually pass ALL required tests...not fail them all, then change the parameters so it isn't canceled.
Nope...Warthog.
Not so far. So far, other stealth planes do what it's supposed to...better. Upgrading them is clearly a better plan.
Not true. All I hear is 'it sucks' because I don't read Lockheed Martin's press releases. When you look at test results, it sucks. When you look at price, it sucks. When you look at upkeep, it sucks ass. When you look at a fleet of them doing everything a dozen different planes today do, we're bankrupt and far less capable militarily, and that sucks.

But it seems no amount of logic and results will dissuade you from your love of this unmitigated debacle. That's your choice, but you aren't convincing anyone else to go along with you.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon