tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post5616121245424339118..comments2023-08-20T03:37:07.774-07:00Comments on PolitiFact Bias: Response to G, of the G'nOBryan Whitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-35949563845953383482016-02-02T11:07:21.538-08:002016-02-02T11:07:21.538-08:00It's too rare for folks to own up when then go...It's too rare for folks to own up when then go awry, so you get major props for doing that.<br /><br />It's not easy assessing things from a neutral point of view, and we try not to lose sight of that. And that's one of the reasons why we try to take all criticism seriously.<br /><br />Thanks for commenting and especially for your graceful conclusion.Bryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-19225306597432874952016-02-02T09:42:46.058-08:002016-02-02T09:42:46.058-08:00Doh! (As much as I hate being the victim of my own...Doh! (As much as I hate being the victim of my own accusations, I'm sitting here hanging my head in shame...)<br /><br />One of my weaknesses (known to me) is that once I apply a misinterpretation to something, I often continue to apply it as long as I stay in my own little bubble and, often times, I need to push the info through an alternate route (ie: hearing vs reading, vice-versa, etc) toG, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-842771849357023432016-01-31T19:48:29.514-08:002016-01-31T19:48:29.514-08:00G, of the G'nO wrote:
"he" = you
M...G, of the G'nO wrote:<br /><br /><b>"he" = you</b><br /><br />My point being, you have no evidence from my post supporting your charge. As I said, I focused on Sharockman's argument and only mentioned PolitiFact to explain context to you.<br /><br /><b>"all I can really do is take what he writes at face value."</b><br /><br />There's the option of not jumping to Bryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-85915561199692390752016-01-31T19:38:31.584-08:002016-01-31T19:38:31.584-08:00G, of the G'nO wrote:
"I think you need ...G, of the G'nO wrote:<br /><br /><b>"I think you need to re-read your original post to understand the specific comment to which I took exception. For ease, I'll quote you one more time here:<br />Your response to Sharockman's comment that Politifact fact checks Obama more that any other, included this:<br />"The only way the number of fact checks of Obama carries relevance Bryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-31132038645172044612016-01-31T19:28:44.461-08:002016-01-31T19:28:44.461-08:00Bryan, to your 6:48 reply:
Since I was speaking s...Bryan, to your 6:48 reply:<br /><br />Since I was speaking solely into Jeff's comments and, in a sense, talking to him about comments I made to you, it would seem to follow that "he" = you, not him, otherwise I would have said "you" meaning him. Your (you) post here, often often look for me to substantiate Sharockman's argument.<br /><br />I'm always OK with being G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-73173746616229214542016-01-31T18:56:42.116-08:002016-01-31T18:56:42.116-08:00ALL html removed...
To Bryan's reply above -- ...ALL html removed...<br />To Bryan's reply above -- isolating the first point:<br /><br />I think you need to re-read your original post to understand the specific comment to which I took exception. For ease, I'll quote you one more time here:<br />Your response to Sharockman's comment that Politifact fact checks Obama more that any other, included this:<br />"The only way the G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-46545194105938342212016-01-31T18:51:03.354-08:002016-01-31T18:51:03.354-08:00"Two more coming sometime soon..."
We h...<br />"Two more coming sometime soon..."<br /><br />We have a Facebook page, if you'd find that easier to deal with.Bryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-44840783640806338822016-01-31T18:48:53.487-08:002016-01-31T18:48:53.487-08:00G, of the G'nO wrote:
"The only disconne...G, of the G'nO wrote:<br /><br /><b>"The only disconnect was that he didn't seem to get that my criticism as being directed toward the way he chose to take on and address his argument. Rather, he kept looking for my support of Politifact -- which just wasn't there."</b><br /><br />Is the "he" above Jeff or me? I don't see in my post above what you could take asBryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-16618867951484604912016-01-31T18:40:52.919-08:002016-01-31T18:40:52.919-08:00Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: ...Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: SPAN<br />Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: U<br /><br />Irritating...<br /><br />Plus -- Your HTML cannot be accepted: Must be at most 4,096 characters<br /><br />Two more coming sometime soon...G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-11116366225938699092016-01-31T16:43:40.613-08:002016-01-31T16:43:40.613-08:00I have deleted a couple of my posts above -- this ...I have deleted a couple of my posts above -- this is only because they were somehow duped copies of previous posts. (No content removed...)<br /><br />I felt the need to com back because there might be a bit more relevant info to add here. Before I get to that, I want to address a couple points from the replies above. First, to the reply from Jeff:<br /><br />First, from my perspective, I was G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-65158726220130127192016-01-30T23:00:59.355-08:002016-01-30T23:00:59.355-08:00My advice is to find an inner critic, or perhaps a...My advice is to find an inner critic, or perhaps an outer one. Your comments should have begun and ended with this--><br /><br />"You state that "[I] don't appear to have made any sort of argument that rescues Sharockman from the charges we've made against him." That is true."<br /><br />You also threaten us with the following:<br /><br />"To be continued...&Jeff D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16256347579300904884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-67724528766142697552016-01-30T22:47:03.432-08:002016-01-30T22:47:03.432-08:00Okay, there' quite a bit on which we agree. Th...Okay, there' quite a bit on which we agree. That's good. At the same time, it's kind of boring, so my reply will focus on the points where we disagree.<br /><br /><b>"some of your commentary on Sharockman's reply was ridiculous"</b><br /><br />Given the context (Sharockman's attempt to use inappropriate stats to prove his point) and my point (highlighting Sharockman&Bryan Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07608604859044029293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-35934319766536766442016-01-30T13:57:03.499-08:002016-01-30T13:57:03.499-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-22101204165878792742016-01-30T13:56:59.875-08:002016-01-30T13:56:59.875-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-60901893700303382462016-01-30T13:44:50.716-08:002016-01-30T13:44:50.716-08:00Part 3 -- or 4 if you assert that I missed 3 above...Part 3 -- or 4 if you assert that I missed 3 above!<br /><br />As a wrap -- you state that "[I] don't appear to have made any sort of argument that rescues Sharockman from the charges we've made against him." That is true. As I mentioned at the top, doing so was not my intent there and nothing has changed here. Essentially, it's my position that "true objectivity" G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-66431048984489761312016-01-30T13:43:46.323-08:002016-01-30T13:43:46.323-08:00To the liberal/conservative imbalance, I agree tha...To the liberal/conservative imbalance, I agree that your comment here (in this thread) holds merit: "Quite simply, touting the large number of ratings given to a special case does nothing to address the imbalance charged by the reader." However, my point in the other thread (now removed from this conversation) were two:<br />1: That some of your commentary on Sharockman's reply was G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-89711278704809495472016-01-30T13:43:00.352-08:002016-01-30T13:43:00.352-08:00Part 2:
To some of the points you've made in ...Part 2:<br /><br />To some of the points you've made in this new post:<br /><br />I feel I actually did acknowledge your criticism of Sharockman's answers regarding the ideological bias of his staff, at least in a way -- I agreed the questions were worthwhile and that what I perceived to be the root of your criticism held water. My point however, was directed more towards the concept of aG, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-52602745774607074902016-01-30T13:41:35.682-08:002016-01-30T13:41:35.682-08:00Looks like I wrote to much here! Part 1:
Haha! I ...Looks like I wrote to much here! Part 1:<br /><br />Haha! I have to say, I guess I'm flattered. This is definitely a first and, yes, does illustrate an example on your part of a fairly substantial response to a critic -- but, more on that later…<br />Just to make clear up front -- you have a lot of skin in this game while I have none. We are not really on the same page, and that's OK -- G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6161368243189108227.post-70348252329839694212016-01-30T13:40:38.220-08:002016-01-30T13:40:38.220-08:00Hello?Hello?G, of the G'nOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420163162007336343noreply@blogger.com