DR. FAUCI BACKED CONTROVERSIAL WUHAN LAB WITH MILLIONS OF U.S. DOLLARS FOR RISKY CORONAVIRUS RESEARC

You think so because you don't practice critical thinking and you distrust everything 100%. This makes you untrustworthy.

 

Incorrect, I work with media and if you think there is unbiased reporting by anyone in the U.S. media you are quite naive.

 

You are mistaken. Good day.

 

No ones mistaken I have seen how the machine works and know lots of people in the industry and it's something most agree about, bias has always been there but as of late it's getting way more intense, actually to the point it is no longer considered incorrect.

 

Fauci's career is well-documented. Are you claiming that none of it is true? That he's been the bad guy, the "mad scientist," all along and no one noticed until he publicly disagreed with Trump, who has no background in infectious diseases?

Having been familiar with Fauci since the mid 80s, and never before reading or hearing about this villainous behavior the right is pushing now that Fauci has expressed disagreement with Trump, are you certain is isn't your worldview in question here?

 

Read Foriegn Policy, The Economist, Barron's, and PBS.

 

PBS that's a joke, ever heard the term "echo of the newsroom?"

It's a term coined by PBS during an internal audit of bias in their own reporting, the network discovered in that audit they had a serious internal bias problem, but the power to be couldn't agree on how to solve the problem, so they just issued a few memo's and went back to business's as usual.

Sadly all reporting is biased because it is written and presented by humans, that was something I was taught in my first year of journalism, while bias is a violation of the ethics of journalism it can only be at best damped down but is never eliminated, the only way to get around it is to seek out the core source of the story.

I have a method of monitoring satellite news feeds for doing just that, with that method I can see and hear what is actually happening before the story is edited and rebroadcast.

And that is the only way to "get the real news."

However most people cannot do such due to the technology required.

 

False. Good day.

 

Incorrect, it's quite true it was something I discovered while writing an article published in News Photographer Magazine on media bias.

 

Watch the 60 minute segmented entitled "Pandemic Politics", it explains how we know that the virus did not come from a lab

 

60min explain pretty well on why the grant was cancel, in short, its "politic"
good to watch.
my opinion is if we dont understand these virus, then its gonna happy again. remdesivir the current best treatment was driven by these studies.

 

I know that.

You all went around peddling the most outlandish conspiracy theory imaginable despite having no evidence to back it up. You just repeated whatever the CIA and CNN was saying at the time. You're the biggest conspiracy theorists around.

 

Really? You have evidence?

 

I was referring to you.

You're the one who just parrots whatever the CIA and CNN are saying on a given day.

They decide for you what a "conspiracy theory" is or is not.

Trump a Russian asset = not a conspiracy theory

Fauci created COVID = conspiracy theory

What an incredibly dishonest framing of the issue. Just... wow.

Anyway, I'm not taking a position one way or the other. I just find it amusing how quickly and aggressively some discount even the possibility that the US government and Fauci in particular were involved in creating this virus, as if the institution of government was above such behavior. In reality, the institution of government is the most criminal, most abusive, and most corrupt in the history of civilization. No other institution even comes close. So while I don't know if Fauci helped create this virus, I certainly wouldn't put it past him either. I'm open to the possibility. But government-worshiping fools just immediately brush it aside as a "conspiracy theory". Not because of "evidence" but because of programming that conditions them to react negatively toward any rebellious thoughts.

 

Evidence for what?

 

First of all, there is no such thing as an "unbiased" news source. Every source has biases.

Secondly, you are just one random guy on the internet. To claim you personally speak for "science and engineering" is one of the most deluded and egotistical statements I've read in a while. Get a grip.

And you're just conditioned to spew forth programmed responses.

 

Wow. Case closed.

 

Lol.

 

I have no opinion one way or the other. Maybe Fauci is a crook or maybe he's not. I just find it amusing how robotically some discount even the possibility that he's a crook. Anyone who uses the term "conspiracy theorist" is just spewing forth programmed responses. They aren't thinking for themselves. And it's obvious.

 

You can't answer a simple question. So, yeah, it would appear the case in closed, but not in your favor.

 

Laugh all you want. Claiming that you speak for science and engineering is delusional.

 

I love hot chocolate

 

You ignored the original question in reply to your claim. Typical Libertarian

 

Yes, how dare I cite my sources using the CIA. Next thing you're going to tell me the CIA's world Factbook is wrong because the World isn't round it's actually a square.

 

Way back when I was taking some journalism courses that was one of the first things our eyes where opened to, one of the exercises was to watch a news report and then determine if their seemed to be any bias in the reporting, turned out every report had bias in it but not all of us could see it depending on our view of the world, and the bias varied by the type of story being reported, some subjects seemed to invoke more bias some less.

But it wasn't until I began stringing part time did I really see it in action, I would record a piece and edit it as instructed, and editing video is one of the first points of bias injection, by leaving out some parts of the video I could turn fiction into facts and make actual facts disappear, never to be known outside of the people involved, and since they have no other way to tell their story, this lying by omission was seldom caught.

Another major injection point discovered by the PBS audit is body language and tone of voice, a pose, a look into the lens, a change in vocal pitch, can all inject bias into the story, while reporting has been traditionally a male world, and I use the term male loosely, in my opinion females seem to be better at this, for of injecting bias.

PBS also correctly determined this form of bias is almost impossible to prevent, people do it instinctively and unless trained in acting, reporters will as well.

And a lot of it comes down to how ethical a person is, an over the top ethical reporter is often a broke reporter, if you want to stay employed, if you want breaking assignments, you listen to and repeat the echo of the newsroom as much as you can, ego's stroking ego's.

That is one of the reasons news, in many cases, is polling lower than Congressmen when it comes to honesty.