Journalists who have worked for the NYT are 10 times more likely to write fake news than journalists that haven’t worked for the NYT.
(media.patriots.win)
posted ago by jeffsmith67589
+2869 / -0
Comments (109)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
Front
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
And the funny shit is that right now on that maggot infested sub covering lefty politics, they are saying NYT is...wait for it...right leaning propaganda! All bc Cotton had an opinion column in there called "Send in the Troops" lol. Now NYT staffers are supposedly revolting against the powers that be and lefties are melting like ❄...over one article in an otherwise far left propaganda rag 🤷♀️😆
Everything they say is backwards. They've long since gone through the looking glass.
We can't expect rational thought and behavior from leftards. They are TRULY & SERIOUSLY mentally ill.
I've seen pedes here state that they were far gone leftards but found their way to sanity, so I suppose even r/politics people can still be cured, but not until they realize they are mentally ill and WANT to treat themselves.
No, it was 1890's-era fake news journalism that pushed emotion and sensationalism more than the actual news or the truth
By who? Government action? You'd run into issues with the 1st amendment.
If I'm reading this right, non-buyers still have a nonzero chance of shooting themselves. Assuming that is very low such that 9x the rate would still be very low. Stats are always framed for a narrative and any data can be made to fit any narrative.
You see this shit in economics reporting all the time.
"Company beat earning expectations by 1000%!!!"
Oh they were expected to make $10 but instead they made $10,000. Not a big difference when revenue is in the hundreds of millions.
Almost all stats provided are bogus when you dig into the details. They are always dressed up to suit the makers purpose.
I'm not a statistician by trade, but I am a data scientist, and this is absolutely correct.
However don't disregard stats all together. They represent an absolute truth, and as such are very powerful. The bias comes in with how they are framed and talked about, so you need to be able to read a statistic and ask "ok what's the source data, where are the holes in the data, and how was it collected"
Yep.. There are three kinds of lies:
Either people hate Mark Twain, or love fake news. Or I’m being downvoted by shills.
"The risk of bowel cancer increased by 80%"
Then later on: from 1 out of 10000 to 1.8 out of 10000
Extrapolated from a sample size of twenty.
just have to say, I love your name. gave me a sensible chuckle.
THIS! I especially like the "increased chance of dying of" BS stats. Chance of dying is 100%, wtf is an "increased chance of dying" lol....
People with pools in their backyard are 9x more likely to drown in their backyard than people without pools.
LMAO.. perfect.
WE JUST WANT COMMON SENSE BACKYARD POOL CONTROL!!!
No Slide. No Diving Board. No Deep End. Nothing that makes a pool look scary!
Can't be having people install 30 round magazine clip semi automatic assault pools
Need it to be fenced in with a locking gate for above ground pools.
It's calling weeding out the dumb
This just in - people who go to the barbershop and get their hair cut are 9x more likely to have shorter hair than people who don't go to the barbershop and get their hair cut!
They probably found this single, rare instance of someone stealing a gun to shoot themselves, and used that as a basis to say that gun owners are more likely to shoot themselves (duh).
Oh, so now they want to talk about how many "gun deaths" in America are actually suicides. (Spoiler: Over half).
Nah, they’re going to casually omit that part of the statistic
I actually went to look at the study here:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1916744
First off, it is 1 state, California. Second, after looking at how they extrapolated their data and adjusted for what they call a "hazard" ratio, I still don't see how the math works out. Third, LOOK AT THE FUNDING. This was one of the first things that was taught to me in my field when analyzing studies for possible biases and limitations. And all this doesn't even take into account intention when purchasing, existing mental illness, misclassification of hangun owners (meaning how they acquired said gun), their estimation of long-gun ownership, gun laws by state, population breakdown, etc. And just look at this statement they include:
Fifty-nine people were killed in the mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017, the deadliest in U.S. history. Approximately the same number die each day in the United States from suicide by firearm. Many of these deaths are preventable. Our study bolsters and extends the message from previous research: ready access to firearms, particularly handguns, is a major risk factor for suicide. Health care providers and policymakers should be aware of this risk. This information is also important for current and prospective firearm owners seeking to weigh the risks and perceived benefits of ownership.
and suicides don't correlate with gun ownership, just gun suicides do. So if people have access to fire arms, they use them in suicide, but otherwise they use other methods.
Its all so tiresome, they know what they are doing when they compare gun homicides in the US vs. gun murders in France.
If you own a gun, you are more likely to kill yourself than anyone else. Because a gun is such an effective killing tool, having one handy makes suicidal thoughts easier to act upon quickly.
The New York Times headline is a joke. Suicides with guns are not a joke.
I am not advocating any new laws or regulations, they would likely cause more problems than they solve. If a man wants to kill himself, I say that every man has the right to end his life if he so chooses.
Some suicides are acts of desperation, desperation that would ease in the fullness of time. Old people are most likely to kill themselves--for those the passage of time only promises decay. Euthanasia is widely practiced in the United States. They call it "palliative care". You pump the patient so full of morphine that they just stop breathing. Often euthanasia is carried out without the consent of the incapacitated patient.
In some ways, doctors are more dangerous to us than guns.
I did not expect that answer when I started this comment. Go figure.
Palliative care is not the same as euthanasia. Palliative care is when the doctors know that death is imminent so they provide you with drugs that will make you suffer less during those final moments. It is not suicide because the purpose is not to make you die quicker, the purpose is to make sure you die without as much pain.
Euthanasia is not when death is imminent and is the intentional killing of a person via drugs. There are a few states that allow it for anyone who wishes to end their life. They do not even have to be in pain at the moment they choose to be euthanized. They are required to have a terminal illness, but they could still have years of their life left with treatment. It is by all means suicide.
That is the official theory. The practice is that morphine is administered in doses that are sure to kill the patient. Accelerating the death of the dying is considered an implicit benefit. I have personally witnessed the acceleration of dying being explicitly described as a benefit by the attending physician.
Death ends all suffering.
You're misunderstanding the statistics. Suicide is the number 2 cause of death for young people. Old people are also much more likely to commit suicide than young people. Both things are true. Old people are just also much more likely to die of a bunch of other causes, so it pushes suicide down in ranking.
The only problem I have with this is that suicidal thoughts are often transitory and with help people can go on to live productive and happy lives. If they can act on their impulse quickly while in the depths of despair then they lose that chance, and that's a tragedy.
All that being said, I'm not suggesting any sort of gun control is the answer
So what in getting from this is that a portion of people who buy guns are doing it to commit suicide? Wow who woulda thought
Exactly this. They’re not going to mention that in the story though. It would upset the narrative
Now do how often non gun buyers were able to defend themselves from criminals
You couldn’t even count that. The majority of crimes that are stopped by guns don’t even require the gun to be fired.
Those people living in NYC are 9 times more likely to die suffocating from smelling their own farts than those who have never lived in NYC, study confirms.
People who own toasters are more likely to make toast... Then you got mf'ers like me who can make toast on a griddle...
I want to know who the dumbasses are that never bought a gun but still found a way to shoot themselves?
Just make them quickly pass the dangerous phase then, as soon as they purchased the first hand gun, they have to immediately buy a second one on the spot
Yes, I actually make this a Friday night ritual to deliberately shoot myself so I can build up a tolerance to bullets.
People who live in multi-story homes are nine time more likely to die falling down steps than people who live in single-story homes.
Can I be an NYT propagandist now?
LOL, so this big brain journalist figured out that people who don't own guns rarely commit suicide by shooting themselves (with guns they don't have). I smell a Pulitzer...
Much safer to buy your 2nd gun
Seems like a bad time to try to scare people out of buying guns, NYT. Sure this is what you want to do right now?
I'm a journalism.
One simple trick is to buy 2 guns!
It's simple then, become a second-time gun buyer
I was born holding a gun, so I know I am safe.
Also, you are more likely to accidentally cut yourself while chopping vegetables or cutting down cardboard boxes. Source: I cut myself the other day.
So then the way to dodge this is to become a second time gun owner and but more? Makes sense. Glad I have way more than one.
No, it obviously is to borrow your wife's boyfriend's gun long term.
Who knew that buying a gun made you more likely to shoot yourself with a gun? What ever would we do without you, oh beneficent NYT.
I did the math and it checks out, purchaser of products much more likely to use said product than non-purchasers
The answer to this clearly is to buy more guns, preferably a long gun.
You're 9 times more likely to die in a car accident if you drive a car.
People who purchase cars are far more likely to die in car accidents than people who never purchased a car.
Funny because after I bought my first handgun, I felt empowered. I no longer felt that should my house and family be threatened, I would be at a disadvantage.
I've become more patriotic, more responsible, more grounded in family and home.
Which is precisely the things the NYT doesn't want people to feel.
Women who have sex are much more likely to get pregnant than women who have not had sex...
That is fucking hilarious. The Times says if you own a gun you are more likely to use a gun than somebody who doesn't own a gun.
How fucking dumb do you have to be to read this shit ?
Don’t buy a gun whatever you do!
"Study confirms that non-gun owner suicide victims were more likely to jump off a bridge, take sleeping pills, or jump in front of a train than gun-owner suicide victims".
Uh oh. Retard alert! Retard alert!
First-time car buyers are much more likely to crash than people who don't own cars.
It's weird because nearly 100% of people who OD on drugs are people who had bought drugs.
People who buy cars are 10 times more likely to get a DUI than those that don't buy cars!
This is screwed up on so many levels. Just to start with this isn't going to slow down someone who has realized they need to defend themselves.
Love that response. :)
People who own dogs are 9 times more likely to get bit by a dog!
“Folks that buy a fire extinguisher are far more likely to have a fire.”
Sounds like a mental health issue to me...
Guys who buy butt plugs are 10 times more likely to be brutally fucked by Mike Obama
Even if that is true it doesn't justify banning the ownership of firearms.
So...people with guns are more likely to shout themselves than people without guns? Isn’t that common sense? How else would you shoot yourself otherwise?
This shows how fucked the free people really are. I feel as if there is a straw that will break the back of the camel soon.
I dont want this. I just want to play video games