What you were referring to was the “lamestream media”. *Your *words. Yes, that’s a ritual.
The thread is not about accuracy as such, but an alleged hive-mind attempt to demonize the AR-15.
So far, that makes you 0 for 2 on even understanding the topic here.
That does appear to be the case, yes. 
Hahahaha. Yes, if the media repeatedly can’t get the story correct, then I consider them lame. It’s the lamestream media that can’t get their stories straight/correct.
Since there was NO AR15, then any reports suggesting/claiming that an AR15 was used by the Navy Yard monster was made up/misinformation/stupidity/outright horseshit.
well, now CNN is reporting there have been shots fired at the Capitol.
They haven’t started misreporting any AR-15s being involved.
If they don’t report AR-15s in any way, does Bricker lose?
They wouldn’t dare, now that they know he’s onto their game.
The automobile crashing the gates will be used to demonize high-powered automatic transmission cars.
If there was no AR15 used and the LSM doesn’t resort to claiming that there was an AR15, then Bricker wins. Unless you haven’t been paying attention to what he’s been saying all along.
The LSM chose to falsely report that an AR15 was used which proves that the LSM did NOT verify their stories before running them.
Will they report that the suspect used a gun, even though she didn’t?
Hmmmmm…
Have you verified any of your information or did you just make that up?
That has yet to be proved.
They did on MSN, saying the suspect shot it out with cops. They just removed it though.
Wait, you’re still claiming that an AR-15 WAS used?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Note my total lack of surprise in this response.
There could have been no actual verification that the Navy Yard monster had or used an AR15 because there was no AR15.
The LSM repeatedly reported that an AR15 was used.
The LSM chose to run with a story that could not have actually been verified.
Your support for the haphazzard, deceptive, pssst poor, lame-ass reporting is interesting. A lame reporter wrote a lame story and a lame editor passed the story on to be published/reported by a lame media outlet. The lame media outlets ran with the phoney story for personal reasons but the fact remains - there was NO AR15.
There is no evidence they deliberately printed a story they knew to be untrue.
Congratulations upon your achievement. Either way, Bricker wins! He cannot lose. Excellent!
If any media, anywhere, any time, decides to go with “We don’t know shit, so we ain’t saying shit”, the public will turn their eyeballs to the media that *does *tell them something. Most everybody knows that’s how they do, and shrieks of outrage only arise when some particular group feels thats they are victimized by that.
If you simply presume that every breaking news type report carries that unspoken caveat, that this is what we have heard as of this moment in time, then you have no problem. Unless you are part of the paranoid partisans who already believe in non-conspiracy conspiracies by the liberal media. In which case, your delusions will most likely be affirmed every time you turn on the TV. But in that case, your problem isn’t the media, but your mindset.
When Fox slips a “D-” in front of a scandal-ridden Republican political figure, is that an innocent mistake?
Sure it is. A mistake, at least. But what are we to make of the fact that the innocent mistake never seems to happen in the other direction? Fox seems to have excellent quality control when the issue is correctly labeling, say, Anthony Weiner as a Democrat.
Why does this happen?
Because the same process is in play as the one I am describing. Oddly enough, you yourself have absolutely no compunction in accepting Fox’s “non-conspiracy conspiracy.” But the NYT …zero chance that their hallowed pages would be sullied by a reporter’s preconceptions?
Well, was it the reporters? The driving engine of this non-conspiracy?
You allege:
(Note: I am not again asking for a cite for this bald proclamation. At the time I did, I was not aware that your personal dignity trumps traditional GD standards.)
OK, that could be inadvertent, the product of ignorance. Except you that insist that these things are “deliberate”. So, doesn’t that pretty much leave no other option but a knowledgeable conspiracy? Sure, if it wasn’t deliberate, it might be possible to have a scenario wherein reporters are not conscious actors, but dupes of some unacknowledged bias. But you say that it was “deliberate”, so that’s out.
Besides, as noted before, reporters must submit to editors, yes? Did the editors also share in this unconscious conspiracy? (Oh, wait, “deliberate” but not a conspiracy…)
So, the editors didn’t amend the reporting? Why not? Were their actions also deliberate? If not, why not, and if so, why?
And finally, despite dire pronouncements about the media, all you’ve got is the NY Times. Granted, the Times is a significant portion of the media. But it is still not quite “the media”?
Perhaps you can clarify?
Except that there was NO AR15 at the Navy Yard. There was no evidence that an AR15 existed. There were “claims” of un-named sources saying there was an AR15. Un-named sources? Really? Seriously? This isn’t a national security issue. What the media outlets initially published can’t be called “news reporting”. It was “rumor mongering”.
It must not be the responsibility of the media outlets to verify the stories that they run with. Don’t hold the media outlets responsible for repeatedly publishing horseshit. It’s not their fault, it’s only their JOB.
The story WAS untrue. The media outlets chose to run the story. The media outlets didn’t bother to verify what they were publishing. Who cares? The media outlets obviously have die hard supporters that will support them regardless of whether they publish fact or fiction.
So the worst they were guilty of was lazy journalism, a far cry from the liberal hard on to besmirch an innocent rifle like the OP claimed.