We are not. We are looking for accurate detailed verified traceable and neutrally framed information.
-
-
-
Click the link! He was talking about standing for "truth."
-
That's a good example of what we don't want: high-level self-serving abstractions. Just focus on doing it right without patting yourself on the back or setting yourself up as the arbiters of truth.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
No we aren't. We want objective journalism. "Standing for something" means you spinning for the Clintons.
-
"Stand for the truth," he added.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We are looking for a 'Press' thats UNBIASED, FAIR AND DOESN'T LIE. NO WE DO NOT WANT OUR PRESS TAKING SIDES IN A POLITICAL DEBATE.
#liberalismisnotjournalism#LiberalismIsAMentalDisorderThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Looking for the truth , nothing but the truth , the whole truth . The whole story - not opinions , not debates , not sermons. Watchers will decide what to stand up for and to.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think the public is looking for a press that simply reports. I don’t think the public cares about their opinion, speculation, or framing, to fit their specific stance.
-
Don’t you understand that
#PresidentDavidDennison DEMANDS to be in the headlines 2-3X a day. DD would whither and die if he was not in every headline, every day.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It’s beyond that. The landscape has changed drastically due to tech. Investigative journalism is where the press can provide the public real value. Access the press was once privilege to has been mitigated, because people can have this access as well through multiple mediums.
-
The country is not anti-press. The country is not in need of the press. An analogy could be a stock broker and investments. The public can trade stocks on their own. They no longer need a broker. It doesn’t make them anti-brokers. Just not in need of it. Tech changed it.
-
The sooner the press realizes the public does not need them in the capacity we once did, the faster this unraveling can occur. The press is resisting technology disrupting it’s industry. They need to evolve. Again, investigative journalism is where they can still offer value.
-
Phil. You're all over the place. Your writing is confusing and obtuse. Sorry.
-
The press/media are fighting tech evolution, which has made consumption of content considerably different. They need to understand we do not need them to report on the news. We do need them to investigate and provide us detailed journalism. Minimal commentary. Get it?
-
I think the press and commentary are still useful and needed. Facts matter. The printed word is powerful. Remember the old adage. The pen is mightier than the sword.
-
I agree, but I guess where I’m going with this is in a world when you can videotape/photograph much of the news, as well as publish it for mass consumption; how much commentary do we need from an alleged expert?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Information is all we need. Your bias has caused manipulation.
-
Hummmm..opinions? What @ FFN?

-
Better than fake news from CNN remember this one.https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6327546 …
-
Nahh....FFN is the best!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.