▲ 144 ▼ Tucker Carlson went after Israel — and his fellow conservatives are furious (www.vox.com) submitted 2 years ago by jeffw@lemmy.world [M] to c/news@lemmy.world 37 comments fedilink hide all child comments Carlson mainstreamed antisemitism for a long time, and conservatives seemed not to care. Then he set his sights on Israel.
[–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I literally provided a direct quote. You not feeling "down'" to verify it isn't really anyone else's problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I shouldn't have to do a "journalist's" work. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ok? It's a bad article. So what? What do you expect anyone else to do about that? You demand information, information that is very easily found, yet refuse to make any effort yourself. What an entitled, lazy position to take. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I didn't demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn't going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. No. You said this - Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. If an article doesn't have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand "we" find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That's basic media literacy. Also, again, I already provided a quote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I shouldn't have to do a "journalist's" work. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ok? It's a bad article. So what? What do you expect anyone else to do about that? You demand information, information that is very easily found, yet refuse to make any effort yourself. What an entitled, lazy position to take. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I didn't demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn't going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. No. You said this - Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. If an article doesn't have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand "we" find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That's basic media literacy. Also, again, I already provided a quote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Ok? It's a bad article. So what? What do you expect anyone else to do about that? You demand information, information that is very easily found, yet refuse to make any effort yourself. What an entitled, lazy position to take. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I didn't demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn't going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. No. You said this - Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. If an article doesn't have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand "we" find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That's basic media literacy. Also, again, I already provided a quote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I didn't demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn't going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. No. You said this - Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. If an article doesn't have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand "we" find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That's basic media literacy. Also, again, I already provided a quote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ech@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided. No. You said this - Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. If an article doesn't have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand "we" find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That's basic media literacy. Also, again, I already provided a quote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that. If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing. permalink fedilink source parent