(09-04-2020, 03:29 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-04-2020, 03:21 PM)lex24 Wrote: It’s not an ad hominem attack to say that the MSM, with the exception of Fox, is progressive. Nor is it an ad hominem attack to say that Fox (which I consider now to be part of the MSM) is conservative. It’s simply the truth.
Right, there's nothing inherently wrong about pointing out a media's biases. However, I think the problem is that usually it is the start and end of a lazy analysis. So you see stuff like "The Atlantic is part of the MSM, thus its story about Trump denigrating war casualties is 'fake news'"
BC
Is that what happened in this thread? I thought I was pretty explicit about what I did not see reported on/investigated in the story about the QB's heart condition.
As for The Atlantic, I don't know much about it. I did read the article you reference. I happen to agree with a lot of the psycho-analysis at a gut level regarding Trump, who is a deeply flawed and insecure narcissist. But I also can see that the anonymous comments are classic hearsay; and that the opinions of some on Trump's mindset are just that. I also looked at the Top 10 articles from The Atlantic today, and the Top 6 are reasonably characterized as anti-Trump.
So it it reasonable or unreasonable to say that I can agree with the crux of an article while also acknowledging that the facts upon which that crux is based are . . . a bit sketchy, and that the publication may have an anti-Trump bias?