Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 6, 2018

Waching daily Jun 29 2018

"This was a targeted attack on the Capital Gazette."

"I'm going to share the names of our five victims

with you now.

First victim's name is Wendi Winters.

Second victim is Rebecca Smith.

Third victim is Robert Hiaasen.

Fourth victim is Gerald Fischman.

And the fifth victim is John McNamara.

For more infomation >> Gunman Kills 5 in 'Targeted Attack' on Capital Gazette Newsroom | NYT News - Duration: 1:15.

-------------------------------------------

Liverpool transfer news: New Nabil Fekir revelation made over £50million summer deal - Duration: 2:17.

 Lyon attacking midfielder Fekir, 24, saw his move to Anfield fall through after problems with his medical

 A £50million fee had been agreed and the player had even given an interview to Liverpool's in-house TV channel LFC TV

 The France international has since been linked with a move to Manchester United but Ligue 1 expert Jonathan Johnson believes Fekir will still join Liverpool

 He told Sky Sports' Transfer Talk podcast: "I think there's a very high chance that he ends up with Liverpool

 "His agent has said that the deal is not done. Lyon president Jean-Michel Aulas has admitted further talks could happen but Liverpool will have to be patient until after the World Cup

 "The way the World Cup has gone at the moment for Fekir, I wouldn't say there's been massive added value on top of his price which is a good thing for them

 "The further France goes, a bit of money could be added on to that asking price." Fekir's agent Jean-Pierre Bernes has too suggested his client could yet join Liverpool this summer despite the transfer breakdown

   "[Fekir] did not sign because it is not finished, the story," he said, when asked about the collapse

 The 24-year-old has dismissed fears over long-lasting knee issues, saying: "My knee is super-good

We work a lot on it, we reinforce it. But I honestly feel like before my injury. "You know I am here with France, I am happy, and I am not here to discuss my personal situation

We will see about all that later."

For more infomation >> Liverpool transfer news: New Nabil Fekir revelation made over £50million summer deal - Duration: 2:17.

-------------------------------------------

「車世界-Report」| HOt NEWS 日本自動車販売ランキング 2017年11月 乗用車1位はトヨタ プリウス1万1,728台 軽自動車 N-BOXが1位 2万992台 - Duration: 2:44.

For more infomation >> 「車世界-Report」| HOt NEWS 日本自動車販売ランキング 2017年11月 乗用車1位はトヨタ プリウス1万1,728台 軽自動車 N-BOXが1位 2万992台 - Duration: 2:44.

-------------------------------------------

「James Doll」 | スズキ 新型 HOT NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 7:16.

For more infomation >> 「James Doll」 | スズキ 新型 HOT NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 7:16.

-------------------------------------------

「車世界」 | HOt NEWS 日本自動車販売ランキング 2017年11月 乗用車1位はトヨタ プリウス1万1,728台 軽自動車 N-BOXが1位 2万992台 - Duration: 2:46.

For more infomation >> 「車世界」 | HOt NEWS 日本自動車販売ランキング 2017年11月 乗用車1位はトヨタ プリウス1万1,728台 軽自動車 N-BOXが1位 2万992台 - Duration: 2:46.

-------------------------------------------

같이 살래요 장미희 나이 프로필 성형 결혼 남편 | News KR - Duration: 3:16.

For more infomation >> 같이 살래요 장미희 나이 프로필 성형 결혼 남편 | News KR - Duration: 3:16.

-------------------------------------------

「Aki Sato」 | スズキ 新型 BREAKING NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 9:06.

For more infomation >> 「Aki Sato」 | スズキ 新型 BREAKING NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 9:06.

-------------------------------------------

How to Catch Fake News Before It Catches You - Duration: 1:02:29.

sure I'm Mickey chick I'll oh I'm the

regional news manager at M live for the west side of the states I live here in

Kalamazoo my interest in this topic is well I'm certainly no expert in fake

news but I am a practitioner of journalism and that's what we do at the

local level every day and I really appreciate this opportunity to be here

and talk about this topic I think it's important probably now more than ever

obviously very timely and so thank you for having me key and I have to share

this microphone so my name is sue Ellen Christian and I teach journalism in the

School of Communication I also teach media literacy and so those two things

together have a lot to do with fake news and thinking about incredible

information and who creates it and why and I think it's a great turnout I think

we're in the media environment we're in I'm just so glad that people are

interested in this topic and trying to learn more about how they can be smart

consumers of media I have my own microwave I'm the specialist tonight

apparently so my area of expertise what I'd like to research and what I write on

is in campaigns and elections political behavior the intersection between faith

and politics and one of the things that we seen in the last year especially

during the campaign is kind of the the idea that fake news has gone mainstream

that it has become so common that now it almost becomes troublesome to try to

assume that what you see is true instead of assuming now that and having

skepticism that everything is false and having to go and do your own detective

work to figure out what's true and what's not and so I think a lot of what

interests me in this process is our is thinking about it being aware of our own

cognitive biases our own desire to agree and to be with people who agree with us

and how that shapes our media consumption and how that kind of creates

a feedback loop that creates what are the infamous bubbles that we live in

thank you all I guess just dive right in with our

first question this term fake news has been thrown around a lot recently so

from here of different different perspectives what does this term mean to

you and you can think it's a useful term or a problematic term what do you think

of this term let's do it I think it looks like you mustard okay I'll go the

term is a misnomer I mean there's really no such thing as fake news because if

it's false it's not news I mean really and I mean at its core journalism is

about seeking the truth and if somebody is peddling falsity intentionally then

that's not news those are called lives you know the term fake news yeah I

understand why we use it and in the conversation I think it's important for

people to discern and dissect what it means I think it means different things

to different people I think to our president it means any story that he

doesn't like and I'm not joking you know when he comes out and says that you know

the media is the enemy of the American people because the Washington Post The

New York Times and CNN are asking tough questions

I think news consumers need to really look at that and and think for

themselves about what that means and then certainly and I think it's all and

Peter know far more than I do about the issue of real fake news which is people

sitting in their basements in Moldova or wherever peddling false stories but I

think it's important to get out there that right now it's the president who is

using this term the most is really elevating its stature and and to really

think about what that truly means and I think it means there are stories and

questions that make him uncomfortable

well when I think about fake news and try to talk about it I tend to agree

that you have news and then there are news that the stories that contain

information that is not true so there are some things that we can say

for example the story that came out last year that there was one of the most

shared stories in social media which was that Pope Francis had endorsed Donald

Trump and so this was completely false information but social media went crazy

with it and it got far more interactions than any of the true stories that were

perhaps equally a scandalous from either side of the of the political aisle so I

think that this question about being able to tell what is just a flat-out lie

that's designed to drive traffic to make money for somebody and what is an effort

at political manipulation trying to get us to act and think differently about

politics for some other political end I think - there's a difference between

news that you don't agree with but that's still accurate and so per Pete's

point of it is not something you want to believe or something that you

particularly are inclined to believe but it's still rooted in facts and sourcing

and credible credible sources I think I really wish we would all come up with a

different phrase than fake news I mean maybe it's BS maybe is I'm trying to

remember to call it something like you know purposeful misinformation because

it's it's designed to deceive that's its point there's nothing as Mickey said

there's nothing newsy about it and in terms of its intent its intent is to get

your attention and so they'll that's pulling no punches

I mean that's definitely doing everything that that particular new site

can do or sorry there I went a particular website can do to to get you

to click on it and to pass it along so in that sense it is all about attention

and not about information so my next question we are seeing a lot more of

this disinformation that purports to be used that perhaps is just downright

false or maybe is misleading and very taking them back but there seems to be a

lot more of it that is proliferating and going viral so what are the consequences

of the massive sharing this proliferation of these misleading or

downright intentionally false stories Peter I think we don't know yet so the

research does come out that has looked at the impact of fake news actually on

the election itself has shown a really negligible effect if you try to measure

that as far as did Donald Trump win because of fake news there's not really

good evidence that that actually occurred but when we look at things in a

little bit more nuanced way what kind of effect would we expect to see from

certain kinds of people consuming certain kinds of news that we see that

people get their own beliefs reinforced repeatedly and so one of the

consequences is that when you get your own opinions reinforced repeatedly

you're much less likely to think that you're wrong and you're much less

amenable to the idea that somebody else could be right and so you kind of shut

yourself off from what could be plausible arguments in an alternative

interpretation so I think this is really one of the major consequences is the

capability of these news stories have for reinforcing what we already believe

in spite of the facts and this is both on the left and the right this is not a

conservative issue this is not a liberal issue everybody has this kind of natural

tendency to process information in certain ways that reinforces that kind

of that kind of thinking I also think that the some of the sites are are just

having fun it's a gotcha joke that's created by a satirical news

site and it's all intent is to be entertaining the other side not only the

confirmation bias and that the factor that people are going to keep believing

what they want to believe in function within a that bubble of belief but for

journalism today I actually used to work with Mickey at the Chicago Tribune so my

background is as a journalist and I feel like there's been never been a more

important time for journalism to stand up and remember its roots and

and it's it's foundational principles of credible sourcing and asking how do you

know what you know and asking that again till you have a really high degree of

confidence that what you're publishing is in fact the most thorough information

that you can get and it's based on primary documents and it's based on

expert sources and I feel like the consequences of the proliferation of

fake news is that there's a further erosion of trust in journalism and a

further erosion of trust in credible news sources and people are more

confused than ever about who do I trust especially if I they're not really my

ideology where do I turn and I think that's a really profound impact on

people who are are already busy and it's a real burden on the citizenry to stay

informed yeah I think that it was a really good point I mean in some ways

just having the conversation around the term fake news provides a win for those

who want to try to weaken legitimate credible news organizations by creating

planting seeds of doubt creating that now look every journalist needs to be

needs to be able to you know stand up and show their you know stand behind

their story and write truthful stories I'm not I'm not arguing against that at

all but it almost becomes like the big lie in some ways with some of the over

and over repeat something until some people maybe not everybody but more and

more people start to think that it's true you know - I think the computer

explain a little bit about you know the confirmation bias and people filtering

themselves with just information that you know confirms what they already

believe I think that's a different issue than quote-unquote fake news and that

can be opinion columns by a conservative columnist or opinion liberal columnist

that you may or may not agree with I think we'll probably get to this in

but and that's that's a whole other major issue in many ways a separate

issue from just peddling stories or falses you know I think cycling back to

your original question when we think about the role of social media in this

we look at the role of Facebook for example we tend to really focus on how

important we are in this particular moment but Facebook is pretty new we

don't really know how it's going to evolve to affect journalism in the

future I think this is a terribly important question because no longer are

people seeking information only tied to just going to a few big news stations

like they were when I was a kid or just a handful of news 24-hour news channels

like when our students were kids but now we're looking at everybody being able to

distribute any information that they happen to come across and I think that

that I don't think we're exactly sure on what the impact of that is going to be

when the people distributing information don't have those kind of that kind of

journalistic ethics that Sue Ellen is talking about another question that I

had is there something unique about the nature of online publishing perhaps even

involving the monetization of the internet that facilitates the spread of

what we're calling for take news well sure I mean everybody the publisher

today and that's a good thing but it also carries great consequences and

anybody can write a provocative tweet or a Facebook post and and if it's you know

exciting enough and gets enough people interesting there that can get shared

you know millions of times that's a good thing but it's also something we all

need to recognize and be very careful about you know when we talk about you

know fake news that in the context of the New York Times or Washington Post or

CNN everything these are trained journalists who are really into hiding

their craft do they make mistakes sure of course video but by and large these

are really good journalists that there's a

very different things and somebody who can write anything on social media and

have it take off and and that's where I think the citizens we really needs to

educate themselves as we go forward this is terribly time consuming to do that so

so I this actually happened to me last month I saw a news story about a guy

that I'm pretty skeptical about and I said oh some of this story came across

my newsfeed I said wow that sounds really provocative I should go check

that out and so I went I checked it out and the story was reporting about

something that he said that was really provocative that sounded just like that

guy should have said just like I thought he would and so I did the the really

intelligent thing and I immediately shared it on Facebook I wiki read it

first I read it first and it had quotes and it fortunately

linked me to the original article and then it was really great for me because

all kinds of people then said I was a really you know it was a really

important that I shared this because people really needed to know this and

thanks doc Maha that's really amazing and then one wise friend said this

really doesn't sound like something that guy would say I said that had to be put

on my professor hat and then I went back to the original article and then went

back to the original source for the original article and it turns out that

two and a half hours of video later he actually ended up using the provocative

statement that was in the original piece to draw his skeptics in so that he could

then spend two and half hours refuting the argument but the problem was it took

me two and a half stinkin hours to get to the bottom of a simple question and

that I think most people are not willing to do that I must have been crazy to do

with myself but it goes it takes a lot of work to

become very well informed them to debunk your own preconceptions it took a long

time for me to do it debunk my preconception in that sense but social

media makes that easy and if I can just say one more thing in terms of

monetization you know if you if you have a blog you what you want to do is you

want to drive traffic to that blog you want to be an Amazon affiliate or you

want people to buy they'll buy stuff through your links through your blog and

you want that right but if you write boring stuff people won't come to your

blog so the most traffic that I ever got was an article that

short blog article that I wrote telling people why President Obama was not a

Muslim and you could not believe the traffic I got on that one so you know

that kind of provocative stuff really gets people's higher up and it gets

their attention and that drives a month that drives money you have some the idea

of how time consuming it can be for ordinary citizens to fact-check

everything that comes across the newsfeed who has if anybody who has the

responsibility to try to monitor or correct this proliferation

responsibility so you could start with advertisers on Facebook and onto social

media sites they can choose to put pressure on on Facebook in particular to

say I don't want my ads to be adjacent to deceptive in content so they could

you know money talks and that's it to me a really natural place that a lot of

people forget they say us and my next point is you know readers read before

you click despite what Pete says I mean hopefully won't always take two and a

half hours but we're going to talk I think a little bit later on things to

look for and help discern what's true and what's not

or at least what's questionable and maybe should take you some more time

hopefully not two and a half hours but that is you know it's I'm I'm impressed

another I was exhausted also you know Facebook and Google have taken some

steps but they can take more to try and prevent the spread of big news now by

the way in the upper right hand corner I believe it is on Facebook on the post if

you think that it's suspect news you can hover your clicker over we or what I

want to see your cursor over it and one of the options that you have now is to

report it is I don't think this is true so that's a step in the right direction

also Facebook has hired some fact third party fact checkers to check information

and they are now labeling stories as false once they have determined

that they're trying to ensure that only quality news is in their newsfeed and

there are certainly experiencing growing pains I think peeps exactly right that's

fairly new in the history of publishing and so as they're figuring out are we

are we a content provider or are we supposed to be doing something more and

they're having their own internal battle with that how much do they control

content they're supposed to be a site that disconnects people and now they're

in a different industry frankly looking at content and how do they monitor that

and do they even want to get into that and how do you deal with censoring and

some other important First Amendment rights so it's not going to be an easy

path but if we look at advertisers and the platforms and then the consumers of

news that's a great start and I think it starts with the citizens you know

democracy is not easy and you know we're a really interesting moment of time you

know we come we come through decades of mass media where you had very few

information holders if you will you know the broadcast networks Ned where our

Murrow and Walter Cronkite and I used to watch dan Rather at night after dinner

and in a few major newspapers that people trusted those days are

splintering as we know and we're in this moment in time where that's

disintegrating and we're into this era where you know again you know

everybody's a publisher and and it's really on all of us it's on all of the

citizens in a democracy - really can we have our digital time yeah yeah

the first thing I do is look at the website and then I think I don't wanna

jump too far ahead but you know I do have you know new sources that over time

I come to trust I do try to fill my newsfeed with a variety of news sources

and so forth but if my first rule of thumb is it gotta where the address that

I don't recognize I you know I look at it pretty cautiously and that's kind of

my starting point but back to the point of the question who's responsible I

really think it's it's on all of us it's citizens in a democracy to really work

this out I didn't think that's the case - and

that's been my one of my important premise in campaigns in general is that

a big part of the reason the candidates act the way they do is because we let

them and we let them get away with yourself and so as citizens we have some

responsibility not just in the media consumption patterns but also in the

political actions that we respond to as an elective entity you know I think this

question about how we handle information is it's an old one it's always been the

case that we've had people that we trust or that we go to who we find trustworthy

to filter a bunch of information for us and this is one of the roles of the

media plays is it's supposed to filter information out so we can get the the

stuff that we need and the problem is though you have most so many different

sources but that seemed to be some coming as really from it from really

specific ideological angles that it's difficult to sort through some of those

questions about the validity of my sources compared to the validity of

somebody else's that comes up a lot is this idea of balanced news coverage even

when we're talking about what we often think of as mainstream media whether

that actually is true or not is another issue but we also run into situations

where the available evidence the facts seem to be much more strongly on in

favor of one particular perspective than another so I'd like to

as making this particularly so how do you as a journalist balance multiple

perspectives and sharing multiple perspectives on an issue when there the

evidence might be strongly in favor of one point of view versus another climate

change right we're you know pretty much 99.9% of people believe that you know

climate change is real and then most of those people believe that there's human

cause to that so how much weight do you give to a climate change denier I would

say it depends on the context of the story you know if you're covering of a

scientific panel that's talking about climate change in the context of what's

happening in Antarctica or whatever you don't you're not required to run out and

find an opposing point of view just to try to gin up the story that said if

there's an event that's being held by a group of climate change deniers or a

panel discussion where it's a robust debate one side of the other then you're

going to give both points of view I think the key is the context of the

story I think ping-pong journalism where you

go and try to give each side equal weight does doesn't serve really anybody

our ultimate goal is to try to find the truth or you know the best version of

the truth that we can possibly find so my short answer is you're not obligated

to go out and find an opposing point of view just to have an opposing point of

view if the overwhelming evidence goes the other way

I would add that there's a bias in professional news as well it's the

fairness bias and that idea of if I give one side I have to give the other well

for starters sometimes there is only one legitimate side as Mickey just gave a

great example of but also often times there's far more than just than one side

and the other there's multiple perspectives and increasingly to me it

points to the importance of authoritative reporting so that you can

actually do what journalists are hired to do which is sort through the

cacophony for news consumers and explain to them we really looked into this and

here's the you know prevailing point of view based on expert data based on

scientific information based on people in the know and we did the work for you

and so the more that news organizations are pressured by the 24/7 news cycle to

publish before they're ready I think the more that because part of its the

commercial need to publish first publish fast but also that news consumers

definitely they want to know it now and so in that sense everyone being willing

to be patient including the news organizations that in some cases might

publish too quickly because they didn't they want to get beat and I think

there's an important element to the idea of authoritative reporting will help to

address that that bias of fairness that that ping-pong journalism that you

mentioned you know that the exemplar comes to me since I don't know climate

change stuff because I'm a social scientist not a climate scientist but I

know elections and so when President President Trump says things like massive

voter fraud took place in which three million illegal aliens voted and caused

him to win the election and I'm sorry caused him to lose the popular vote

right or that busses were going from Massachusetts to

New Hampshire busing in people to vote in New Hampshire with absolutely no

evidence I mean I I think every liberal I know would love to find actual

evidence of actual voter fraud that would completely undermine Donald

Trump's election they would love that and so you think if we're out there that

they would be the ones to find it but I think here's where the reporting comes

in is that all the research that's out there that looks for voter fraud has

found voter fraud but in very small amounts scattered all over the place in

a completely uncoordinated pattern and there's no widespread systematic

evidence for voter fraud at all it's virtually impossible to make happen in

this system like ours and so I think the media then has a really remarkable role

to play in this because they can simply say there is literally no evidence and

what reason this comes to mind is that the New York Times a few weeks ago

published an article which they were responding to Kelly and Conway talking

about alternative facts and they basically laid out the the parameters by

which they would actually call a prominent politician out as perpetuating

a lie you know they identified the difference between untruths and

alternative facts or alternative interpretations and actually saying

Donald Trump is perpetuating a lie that can and they spent a long time

justifying what it would take for them to do that in terms of identifying

intent on the part of the person who is dissenting from in giving this

alternative narrative of something that is the very broad consensus among

elections professionals so I think that this is a really interesting aspect of

question for journalists you were seeing something right now that I've never seen

in my career which is you know leads of stories saying you know

president Trump asserted , without evidence , just shutting down certain

claims in headlines and first sentence of stories and and I think that media

needs to be careful that they're absolutely right without you know

whatever news organization is doing that but

I've never seen this in my career and journalists today have to be that much

more on their game than to come to these press conferences prepared and ready to

ask tough follow-up questions because of some of the assertions that are being

made the techniques that journalists typically used to check your stories

well talking to credible sources as one credible sources is one quite you

looking at credible documents whether it's a you know give an example you know

if there's a house fire in Kalamazoo and the Kalamazoo Department of Public

Safety puts out a news release or Western puts out a news release about

something happening on campus that's a credible news or a source you know our

currency is journalist is credibility and that currency only goes so far as

that people believe the stories that we produce whether it's TV radio online

whatever and if we get it wrong and yes we get it wrong from time to time we

make mistakes that we correct that because that goes to to the credibility

of the news organization and that we put our Corrections out there and we're

transparent about that but the techniques are to talk to people and to

look at sources whether documents or otherwise or at you know public meetings

that there are credible sources of information yeah got it I just add that

investigating if people are who they say they are so if I'm reading a news online

news story and I'm not sure I don't know that particular federal agency or Bureau

of whatever it's easy to Google and yes journalists you know use Google just

like everyone else as a starting point and then going from there to try and

think through how else do I know that this information is credible so talking

to a variety of expert it's not just one or two looking for

primary documents is essential talking to people who were at the event as

opposed to second and third-hand information all of those sort of tried

and true techniques that journalists do I think that news consumers can do as

well the challenge in that though is that when you make a mistake the

retraction or the correction never gets as much publicity as the original

exciting sexy story and so the problem is that the exciting sexy headline gets

can go viral but then the correction just kind of doesn't really make it into

the popular circulation as much and so I I'm you know this is this is great for

us to know this but as critical consumers what can we do to become aware

of when those Corrections happen so that we kind of have this continual

monitoring is there a way that is there like a standing database or something

that that we can use to try to see that in that it is that corrected information

yeah I think for the newspaper we - I mean if there's a major error you will

see a correction on page one that's pretty where typically we're not talking

about show-stopping fundamental errors that alter the course of the story it's

usually a fact in the middle of a story or something that yeah misspelling or

some sort of fact of you know how the fire started this versus that that gets

wrong and and yes often those are are put on page two online we correct the

story online and will note that the story is impressive and that's alright

well it depends I mean if it's a if it's a correction again it goes to those I

guess the heart of the story we will put them at this if it's more of a ancillary

detail that was wrong we'll put it more at the bottom

context I think is important for questions as well a little while ago

Peter you mentioned filter bubbles and I think most of us are probably familiar

with this term at some at this point so when a media consumer largely interacts

with people who agree with them who are sharing stories which reinforce a

particular point of view what can we as consumers do to try to step out of our

filter bubbles well I'll tell of this audience what I tell and that is to make

sure and be intentional about seeking alternative and multiple and diverse

sources of information so if I if I have students in my class are who are liberal

I tell them every once in a while you ought to tune in to Fox News and listen

to what they're saying and see if there could be something what their argument

is for my students who are conservative I say every once in a while you should

probably go watch Rachel Maddow okay just to see if what she has to say

resonates or make sense or seems credible I tell them about my own media

consumption habits I'm really straightforward with them in the

mornings I tend to watch Morning Joe because I like knowing here's the

conservative guy here's the liberal woman all of their guests you know where

they stand right and so I appreciate that they bring in people with different

perspectives to argue about stuff and to even to make they're there in their

snide little comments or their jabs you know that's useful for me to kind of

recognize the vocabulary of the conservative job in the liberal jab so

that I can be a better more well-rounded consumer and then I can go out and

gather information from other sources as well but that that basic exercise of

regularly and intentionally getting information from sources that you do not

naturally agree with I think is really important for your intellectual

development yeah hold true for Thanksgiving dinner as well where you've

gotta sit next to the relative you don't agree with I think it's really true it

means don't don't unfriend the person on your Facebook feed who you're ready to

unfriend and/or do worse - so you know seeking out alternative viewpoints and

and no kidding trying to cultivate a variety of people in your in your life

and in your social media sphere who might challenge your beliefs I

I also think a really great tip is to challenge those who are extreme within

your ideological point of view so the champion moderates to champion moderate

viewpoints I think is really important to our our public dialogue yeah I

couldn't agree more about intentionally speaking out this goes that's my point

about the responsibility being on all the citizenry I think it's all of our

responsibility to seek out sources of information multiple sources of

information quick funny aside I remember my father during the Olympics every year

would watch the Olympics I'm CBC because he wanted the Canadian perspective

because again so bummed out by hearing the pro rah rah rah Americans if you

want to hear another perspective so we've watched the CBC in the Olympics

but but is that kind of example that I think we could all learn from in terms

of our news consumption going forward yes right if you're a Twitter user like

I am follow multiple news organizations follow NPR follow Fox they just follow

you know all the big ones in and and but including those that have other points

of view one of the best interviews from this past weekend was Chris Wallace at

Fox News just taking it to Wright's previous over this over Trump's tweet

about the media being an enemy of the American people I think the chief of the

staff of the president thought he was going to get a friendly interview from

Fox News and he got a whole world of hurt and tough questioning frankly and

and analysts it was really interesting as a journalist to watch

well that came online a couple of months ago in the walls of eternal they have a

red feed blue feed of websites that you can go to and basically they've gone

through and they've found kind of red meat red red sights that kind of red

meat blue sights and they show you parallel tracks of what the kinds of

posts are that you see coming on a particular story so if you pick Donald

Trump then you get this a stream of kind of super liberal screens about Donald

Trump and his latest things and then on the same page you get a slew of what the

conservative sites are saying about Donald Trump I'm really the kind of the

same set of issues and I think this is really useful and I'm you know I think

students who look at that can get it get a sense of and adults too let's be

honest you can get a take a look at that and say what do I recognize in terms of

what I like to see this because reading this red feed make me feel really good

or does the reading this blue feed make me feel really angry or however this

works out in your ideology I think it's really good for you to be able to

recognize the buzzwords that are being thrown around by both sides I tell my

son about this and he said you know that I never really found that kind of stuff

any very useful so what I found useful was then finding reading those kind of

extreme articles and then going to find a really well reported well-balanced

article to see how it ought to found and so I thought that was really insightful

from from him to get both of those and then look how look at how it's supposed

to work and be a seeker of facts don't just read a bunch of opinion whether

it's left or right search out good factual articles or news sources and how

do you know the factual we'll look at the sourcing look who they're talking to

are they are they sourcing to credible bodies of information but but seek out

facts and don't just get caught up in the political talking points and the

opinions that because of look opinions cheap you know facts are hard to come by

and should be cherished

you want to make sure we have some time for audience to die so I'll just finish

with this one last thing are there any um any sources that you consider to be

your go-to sources for factual information or middle-of-the-road

I don't necessarily want to say unbiased but let's go with less biased sources I

love the BBC probably / Nikki's father's points you know and out of the us

centric point of view is I love Al Jazeera

I wish they still had a DC presence I just wanted to say that I also think

that the fact check sites if you don't know about them factcheck.org what

effect and I know I've heard liberal friends

say I mean conservative friends say you know those are have a liberal spin to

them they're not really checking all the facts but I think that the four big ones

taken together really give you a pretty accurate view of what's not true so if

you're really questioning it's a great place to start I you know I'm amazed I'm

a mainstream journalist I tend to follow and a lot of the mainstream news

organizations I I do read the Washington Post quite a bit as part of my Kalamazoo

Gazette subscription you can unplug here but you get free access unlimited access

to the Washington Post and I know that you know there are conservatives in fact

right before the start I have an email from somebody blasting the Washington

Post is liberal look if you read the columns in editorials sure they have a

left bet I'm more interested in factual reporting and they have really

high-quality factual reporting NPR is great BBC is great I do follow Fox News

on Twitter I don't watch a lot of cable TV personally but I do

a consumer a lot of news on online and but again I'm not interested in Bill

O'Reilly and Sean Hannity nor my frankly interested in Rachel Maddow I'm looking

for news factual you know fact-based news and a lot of those mainstream

organizations do a very good job of that there's much political news I get a lot

I think Politico is fairly reliable I think in

general newspapers like the New York Times and The Washington Post they're

factual reporting is pretty reliable and NPR I think is pretty reliable but but

here's the thing is I oh I don't go in thinking that because it's on these

particular sites that it's by just by definition true right I always try to

keep a skeptical view because not so much because I think journalists are out

to present a permit a skewed view of the world but I think that the kinds of

questions that they ask the kinds of stories that they write would do reflect

a certain point of view I think MPR is reporting for example in general on

Morning Edition and all things considered is pretty good reporting but

they certainly ask the kinds of questions that are mostly of concern of

you know secular people who are center-left and the kinds of questions

that they ask I'm not hearing questions that I might think that that sound

conservative or that sound particularly faith-based and so it's not I think that

they're trying to intentionally skew things I think they just most reporters

just don't see things from a certain perspective and so they asked different

questions but I'm balanced the reporting I find to be pretty good where where I

think conservatives have don't understand it places like NPR is they

listen to the to the talk shows so they listen to on point or they listen to

Diane Rehm or something like that and of course she's off the air now but they

listen to those and they say there's those tend to have much more liberal

bent in terms of the guests that they have on the questions that they ask the

presuppositions that they bring to the table so whatever news source I listen

to I just try to keep in mind what is the general tenor of and instead of

assumptions that the journalists seem to be bringing to the table in their

reporting and just use that as is making sense of what they say not

that I think they're trying to you know indoctrinate anybody but they've got a

worldview in that matters those two consuming multiple sources of news and

then being a critical thinker be a critical news consumer don't just take

one source as gospel I'd like to open it up to the audience for questions um we

are recording the session let's go for the purposes of our reporting I'm going

to repeat back to any audience question so that we microphone can pick it up I

would also like to invite anybody to come on and ask dollarfranc needs to be

a job creator and it has an entirely new is burgeoning industry in Sabrina

I mean there are certainly versions that people have different points of view in

different versions of stories right I mean a fact as a fact you know the sky's

blue or the waters wet that sort of thing but different people think you get

but different people can go to this event and come away with their own

version there you know you use their own biases their own perspective and so

forth so there are I think different versions of truth perhaps my job is to

try to seek out a verifiable version of the truth of any given event and in

terms of whether Donald Trump is fact check I think Peter answered that I

think the answer is there's a whole lot of people who are working on

fact-checking the president's those lady websites as Sue Ellen mentioned or

factcheck.org and PolitiFact those are two big ones and Washington

Bothell Washington Post fact checker as well easily just like Lisa's in but

now like that that's a big historical question

I can tell you the political part of the political story is that over the last 40

years the political parties in general have become more polarized so largely

kind of stimulated by the civil rights movement the Democratic Party saw that

it was going to start encountering massive losses in the south and the

Republican Party saw opportunities for gain in the south

and so what happened is that in your grandparents generation you could find

at any given point in time in Congress a lot of liberal Republicans and a lot of

conservative Democrats by the time we got to the 1980s the night that started

to deteriorate and by the time we get to this decade there are virtually no

liberal Republicans left in Congress and there are virtually no conservative

Democrats left you can find a handful who on a couple of issues are not quite

as liberal or not quite as conservative but the national level I think this has

really been driven by political party strategy and opportunities that they've

seen in the in the political environment and to a certain extent I think they

it's hard to tell where the where the causal arrow belongs so to some extent

people think political scientists think that this might have come from the

grassroots and filtered up to the top and there are other political scientists

who look at the question and say this really was an elite kind of set of

transitions and then we're starting to see that's reflected now in the public

more than we did in the past so big picture there's a long historical story

that has I think mostly to do with kind of American sorting to the two major

political parties and I think that racial divisions and the civil rights

movement and its impact had a signal to play in them and to piggyback on that

the other element is money and the incredible amount of financing that's

going into campaigns now and the more extreme the candidate the more money

they're able to generate for their campaign and it's very difficult to be

an underfunded candidate and get attention and and pay for the

advertising you need to pay for in this attention economy that's what we're in

with social media it's an attention economy so how'd you get your attention

as a fledgling candidate who's underfunded and that's really difficult

because of just what we're talking about people don't spend time to read

something they're flipping through their feed sorting and clicking and passing

and sharing and so the more vitriolic points of view

so real thing means or legitimate state news you know there were websites and

there are websites and I am NOT an expert in having Peter expelling know

more about this idea but there are you know websites that are purveying just

falsehoods you know that before the election putting out certain points of

view generally pro-trump for the most violently yet words that were that we're

generating false are okay and they're intentionally putting out fake news so

that's the real fake news element I think the term though is now being

co-opted by the President to essentially label any story he doesn't like or when

he gets tough questions about an issue that he doesn't appreciate and in you

know you I watched his chief of staff's interview on Fox News Sunday also

whenever they see an eye on the sourcing they see that as an opening and anytime

journalists use amount on the sourcing and Dave Beck you know that gets dicey

because we serve to put our credibility on the line stories better be right if

you use anonymous sourcing and so I'm not saying there's no fake news there's

there are the fake news website and then I'm saying the other to me the bigger

more troublesome issue is this labeling of stories fake news as an attempt to

try to put journalists on their heels and plant seeds of doubt in the public's

mind

certainly there are new sites that are ideologically biased so they are

presenting it's a real event in the real speech or a real you know development

that's worthy of coverage but they are reporting it by very selective sourcing

so it's going to sources that they know are going to agree with a particular

point of view whether it's right or left or you know something in between and so

I think it there is legitimate news that then is distorted by ideological bias so

that's still an event that happened it's rooted in reality but then it's yeah

it's distorted by the sourcing and by how the story's approached for the

audience Pete mentioned earlier like an NPR audience there's a specific audience

that a news organization knows as its base and remember you know part of the

struggle here is that news organizations are trying really hard to stay afloat

and make money and so edit you know I keep coming back to money because it

drives it drives a lot and so in this case those news organizations still have

to make money and they yes it needs to be you know so you can be in new york

times and be rooted and i want to we want to do credible well source

reporting but it also knows it's base and it's base is going to be a little

bit probably center and center left and so that drives the kinds of stories that

they're probably going to have their reporters pursue to a certain extent it

doesn't mean they're going to ignore stories that are don't fall within that

range but to the extent that they are deciding on how they're going to shape

the story that there's a there's a there is a financial truth to the news

organizations that sometimes isn't always talked about I think

that that there's a difference between the new story that's reporting facts and

the analysis that comes along with that story that interprets the story for the

reader that said that tells the reader what the facts what the events mean why

are they important what are the consequences and lots of times I think

it's not that the dispute over the simple facts present president not an

excluded but the idea is that we given a certain set of facts so what and where

you see ideology comes into play is it's in the so what angles to the stories the

framing of the stories the the talking about the consequences of the stories I

think that's where you end up with ideology driving things so it's not

going back to your original question I think it's not so much that there's

there are multiple truths being told if that the meaning of the basic facts is

is in dispute and why it's important there's a there's a notion of difference

between fake news and and a columnist or maybe a journalist who has a certain

bias that they bring to a story that's been thick given everybody's got some

bias and object you know in the sole idea of objective reporting as a whole

or conversation but I think it is a huge disservice to the New York Times NPR CNN

to just label them fake news because you don't like a story and and and so and I

think it's how the news consumer to understand the difference between a news

story and an opinion piece and to understand you know and be discerning

and be a critical reader and a critical thinker when you're consuming that that

information I think it's really helpful the New York Times actually have gotten

much more specific about when you see a story about labeling it as op IDI

analysis or some or news or something like that they've been more specific

about their labeling I would just go push back a little bit on one thing that

you did say and that is that Donald some Donald Trump is planting seeds of doubt

and in the confidence of journalism I think that when you look at the politics

of the right they've been doubting mainstream

journalism for 30 years and and so he's not he's not he's not laying low he's

not but he's not planting the seeds he's just cultivating what has already

been a $1 weapon well watered wasn't you you're not coming on you know I want to

make this argument applaud military students where are some of the other

writing online Facebook feeds strictly about property really important to that

but now

I just want to make sure that I'm clear - in response to her question that I

don't mean to complain at all that the ideological bias is somehow fake news so

if that came across that's not what I meant at all and pologize it so I I

agree with you Margaret that that the journalism is facing an unprecedented

challenge here and the the importance of pursuing fact and not pursuing the the

fake balloons that are being elected the trial balloons that he puts up or that

the tweets and pursuing sort of the misleading

yeah social media posts that that everyone chases after as opposed to I

really feel like they the folks I know in DC they're exhausted already and I

think they're trying to figure out what do we really need to follow and what do

we what do we just say we're gonna ignore that one it's not worth our time

and I think that's part of what everyone's trying to get up to speed on

from the the colleagues that I have who are are covering the White House it's

definitely not chasing down every story but keeping it's like a long distance

run here so keeping their energy to run for the long distance and also pursuing

the stories that are truly important to 2-tier point to democracy to - how are

how is the lawmaking happening Howard checks and balance is happening and if

there's an obnoxious tweet or if he throws down with the media for

20 minutes really do we need to cover that I would argue let let's rise above

it and go and and serve the public with really great reporting this fact-based

not that that's not happening but I think it's hard to cover at all and then

one of the tweets happen it's easy to follow again for the attention Academy

second about the propagate your propaganda comment you know I think that

our pro the trouble that people are having with Donald Trump is not that

he's about propaganda because I think in America we've been pretty we've grown

accustomed to pretty sophisticated propaganda campaigns from politicians

for many many years and I think what's stunning Americans about Donald Trump is

how amateurish his propaganda is he I I was having this argue with the friend

online and the kind just make stuff up and and my friend who's a different

ideological persuasion you know all he could say was yeah but look at what

President Obama did you know all of his selling about Obamacare keep your doctor

insurance rates Benghazi's and on the IRS all this and his every response that

he gave to my saying Donald Trump just make stuff up was going back to

justifying it because of what he'd receive Donald Trump is doing so I think

we've gotten accustomed to sophisticated propaganda and focus-group propaganda

instead of kind of seeing at its core which is just making stuff up and see

what see what works is that Donald Trump does that on the fly at at 3 o'clock in

the morning I'm on tweet on Twitter

Zoomers become such a microwave nation that meat is need everything right now

that we're feeding into the state news coming in and get drove us that we're

not taking this we don't have a clue in the powers of allah therefore we're just

see anything really started like a statement that I agree right did I agree

with no I mean it in many ways we've gotten lazy and and I

guess one of my takeaways are one of my points on is I think this is a really

critical time not just for journalists but it's a critical time for citizens we

need to reevaluate where we get our information where we get our news and

and be critical thinkers be fact seekers and and and get up off of our couches in

some way and go out and be intentional and look for fact-based news and you

know maybe we've gotten a little complacent in that regard in the last 20

years or so my 10 second tip is to read beyond the headline and I would just say

about two and a half hours it was a subject that I really cared

about but I felt like my credibility was on the line because I had shared this

story and said look at what this guy does and so I needed to go back and

double-check my sourcing to make sure that I had accurately communicated it

right so I was invested in not just getting the story right as a prototype

phase book but in terms of you know making sure that I as an opinion leader

in my community had done my job correctly because people trust me to

give them correct information and eventually most of us are going to be

opinion leaders in our communities that gives us responsibility to make sure

that we are not just throwing stuff out that sounds good it makes us feel good

but that we're actually doing our job because we're providing information look

this is a huge massive information environment and people are always

looking for a way to funnel information to find shortcuts and if we become the

credible sources because in our particular Lane our particular area of

the world our circle of friends people say I can trust what that guy says I can

trust what she says that's important but it brings responsibility

For more infomation >> How to Catch Fake News Before It Catches You - Duration: 1:02:29.

-------------------------------------------

Moral Side of the News: July 1, 2018 - Duration: 30:03.

For more infomation >> Moral Side of the News: July 1, 2018 - Duration: 30:03.

-------------------------------------------

「James Doll」 | スズキ 新型 BREAKING NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 9:06.

For more infomation >> 「James Doll」 | スズキ 新型 BREAKING NEWS ハスラー マイナーチェンジ 特別仕様車「J STYLE Ⅲ」「FリミテッドII」2017年12月4日発売 - Duration: 9:06.

-------------------------------------------

[ENG SUB] 180629 MONSTA X THE CONNECT in Bangkok - CH3 Morning News Interview - Duration: 10:56.

The guest in Entertainment Family is 7 well-known KPOP guys

that is coming really hard -Yes -That's Monsta X

Sawaddi kha

As always Jaeyong will come (she works as translator for many K-Idols)

MC: A welcome for them

MC: And importantly,this is the 4th they come to Thailand

MC: Please let them introduce themselves

JY: Can you please introduce yourself?

SN: We will start to introduce ourself. 1,2,hukk! MX!

Hello,we are MONSTA X!

MC: Can you introduce yourself one by one? JY: One by one please

SN: Hello,i'm Shownu, nice to meet you!

JY: He is glad to meet you,Shownu-ssi

WH: Hello,i'm Wonho. JY: He is Wonho

MC: Wonho~~

HY: Hello,i'm Hyungwon,i miss you~

JY: he is Hyungwon

MH: Hello,i'm the energizer in MX

I'm Minhyuk (i cant get what he said)

JY: He is Monsta X's energy,Hyungwon -ssi

JH: Hello,i'm Monsta X Jooheon

IM: Hello,i'm MONSTA X I.M. Miss you~

JY: Monsta X IM and miss you~

KH: Hello,i'm Kihyun

MC: As I known,their fanclub name is MONBEBE

MONBEBE Thais are been waiting for them since 1 AM

-Since 1 AM? -The first MBB waited since 1AM

They are arranging chairs and waiting since then. You must acknowledge this

Your Thais MBB are waiting

you since 1 AM

Tomorrow is the day where MX

come here for the concert named "MONSTA X WORLD TOUR "THE CONNECT in Bangkok"

MC: In this time concert,what are special things that they prepare for Thais MBB?

JY: Since this is the second time you held concert in Thailand

is there anything specials you prepare for Thais MBB for tomorrow? Can you please tell us a lil bit?

MH: First of all,we have prepared a new, unique stage which cant be seen anywhere yet. Please anticipate a lot

JY: He said that the special thing that they've prepared is they have this stage

which somewhat unique and this stage

never been shown anywhere before where they have held concert for the first time in Thailand

MC: Talking about they're coming here as the forth time

is there anything they remember

as in Thais MBB?

(JY translates)

IM: For me, whatever it is,

people.. what it's called, Thailand's people

are really kind

And for a personal reason,

honestly, my auntie also is a Thai person.

JY: Ahh, he feels that everyone in Thailand

is so cute

and very kind and he told that,this may seem personal

but in his family,which is his aunt is also a Thai person

MC: Please tell us a bit

in the 6th Mini Album 'THE CONNECT'

is said to be made,composed and sung by the members

Youre good at singing,dancing and even composing songs

What is the songs, and which members composed the songs, can you tell us on that?

(JY Translates)

JH: This time MONSTA X's album

i wrote lyrics with Wonho hyung

and I participated in writing lyrics for 2 songs

It's an honor for me to do so

JY: Jooheon

and IM wrote for rap parts

while Wonho and Jooheon are collaborating in writing the lyrics for "If Only"

MC: They're totally bunch of handsome men that have capabilities

MC: We cannot skip talking about this song,which is "Jealousy"

This song charted as No 1 Album in 25 countries on i-Tune

No 1 in 25 countries

Please talk about this successful song

SN: It is very exciting

because we dont expect people to love this song

It's very exciting and different feelings

JY: They are very thankful

MC: Everytime this song plays on concert

the stage sure to be lit in fire. Today I want

our studio's stage to be filled up with fire. Can we take a little look please?

JY: Are you ready? SN: Yes,yes I will show a simple one?

MC: We will take a little peep

WH: Which way should we be looking? This way? That way? (shownu & wonho are lost af lol)

SN: I think this way WH: Ahh,this way MH: Here? Here?

MC: Please tell them if they need anyhting

MC: Nong Bai (female MC) is very excited than usual

MC; Of course,the song itself,and the members

are working hard in dancing

and they're very cute

MC: Can you tell them that they're dancing in sync,so beautifully and they're cute?

MC: They're just like switch,detecting the camera and just went in

MC: Tomorrow is the day where Thais MBB will have fun

with them and how Thais MBB should be ready in this concert?

JY: Since you're meeting Thais MBB for tomorrow

how MONBEBES

should be ready? We are wondering

-Ohh,they should be eating rice

and maybe brings energy? -As we will use a lot of energy

JY: He said that MBB should be eating rice a lot

because they need to use a lot of energy in the concert hall

MC: Thais MBB,please eat a lot of rice!

And then they will be too full and exhausted to dance

(They're giving away tix and explaining the ways,so I will skip the trans part )

(Anyway,they're giving away 10 free tickets)

MC: This is the another long waiting concert in Thailand

Is there anything they want to tell to their fans,MONBEBES that are waiting for this show?

SN: First,we are holding

a concert tomorrow in Thailand

and I hope we have a good time with fans

and for those that just know us

-I hope I can work more in Thailand after this and will gladly will greet you in the future

MC: They have been in Thailand for few times,so what is

their favorite menus so far?

MH: Mangoes

MC: Ouh the mangoes, it must be sticky rice mango?

-Pad thai! Pad Thai! It's really delicious

JY: They're already eaten yesterday MC: Pad thai is menu for welcoming guests

MC: They already ate yesterday? MX: Yes yes

MC: If they're not still eat,outside there will be pad thai waiting for them

JY: They say if you havent eat,they will prepare it for you

MX: No,no we havent it yet! We can eat it again

JY: They say they can eat one more time!

MC: Staffs, please prepare for them!

MC: Since time is almost up

from the first MBB who have waited since 1 AM, can you please tell something

for them who have waited back there? and maybe meet them afterwards

HW: For fans that have waited for so long

I'm very thankful and touched

and for expressing my gratitude,when we go back

I would like to go and greet them for once then it would be great

(talking about where the world tour is held

MC: Thank you for coming to our show!

MC: Can you ask them to make cute faces for the fans out there?

MC: Fanclub please ready to screencap

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét