Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Monday, July 10, 2017

R.I.P. CNN

They did it to themselves. For example (click directly on the graphic to enlarge it):



CNN has gone from the most trusted name in news to fake news. Therefore:



[hat tip to Infidel Bloggers Alliance for the first graphic in this blog post]

138 comments:

  1. I’m not sure that CNN is giving up much of its market share to competitors, and it does not appear that many sponsors have abandoned their support for yellow journalism. My view is that there are millions of Americans who absolutely love what CNN is doing ... which is why they are doing it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mustang,
      My view is that there are millions of Americans who absolutely love what CNN is doing ... which is why they are doing it.

      No doubt.

      But I know a few family members -- centrists and even liberals (now former liberals) -- who used to tune into CNN, but do so no longer.

      Delete
  2. The state of the American news media [infotainment industrial complex] is horrendous, across the board, with very.....very few exceptions. That said, the 'media bias' argument is rather irrelevant when Citizens don't hold their own elected representatives to a higher standard than said media. When 'fake news' comes from both New York corporate offices, and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.......neither side has intellectual integrity as their currency.

    - CI

    ReplyDelete
  3. How much is DJT playing the media? One Twitter user suggests THIS. Enjoy!

    If you wonder about the original cartoon, see THIS CARTOON CLASSIC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Detournement and culture jamming used to be tactics employed exclusively by the Left. Trump uses Twitter daily to inflict symbolic violence upon America's former "culture mavens" to devastating effect. Neoliberal cultural capital is daily acquiring a new, ever more "oxidized" lustre... soon every woman in the wrold will want to look and dress like Ivanka. :)

      Delete
  4. I agree with Mustang's assessment.
    Ideology blinds.
    Trump Derangement Syndrome abounds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Meanwhile, it looks like their viewers are moving on to MSNBC....complete with Madcow. So if we thought fake news was bad, how about Russia Russia Russia indoctrination for the next 4 years with MSNBC? Morning Joe was at it again. Full bore, no let up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Reports of CNN's demise are greatly exaggerated.

    As Bunkerville suggests, one of the primary reasons they are losing viewers is that they are not sufficiently crazy left, so the leftwing nutballs are moving to Moonbats Sniffing Nut Ball Crap.

    Unfortunately, if there is an audience for down-the-middle, reasoned analysis, it has so far gone undetected by the Infotainment Media Complex.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fox, Breitbart, INFOWARS, et all, are the real fake news and yellow journalism folks. Trump's favorite people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excuse me, Ms. Head, you spelled your first name incorrectly. It's B-O-R-E-'-S

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous (Drusilla von Eisenhart),
      Comment deleted.

      This blog is not interested in gossip related to other bloggers.

      Delete
  8. @AJ,

    "it seems that the pissed off Hillary lovers found another excuse to knock the President this past weekend...Ivanka Trump received lots of accusations of nepotism after she stepped into her father seat for a brief period at the G-20"

    So, where was the outrage when meddlesome Shrillary, during Slick Willy's reign, said, to the effect: 'you are getting two for the price of one'?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was no backlash to Hillary especially forming health insurance legislation?

      Did you have your had in the sand?

      Delete
    2. Ahhh, the pathfinders never get any credit, do they, McDuck?

      Delete
    3. "Did you have your had in the sand?"

      Isn't it a bit early to start toking?

      Delete
    4. Drusilla von Eisenhart said

      When are they going to realize the suacker is a troll, and kick his fyewking feathered butt the hell OUTTA here once and for all?

      Delete
    5. Yes, there was outrage, no doubt about that....but not as much as if Ivanka had volunteered, or Melania, to put together a healthcare plan, that's for SURE.

      Now little Miss Chelsea's tweeting Trump lecturing him on how he should read Aesop's Fables. His petulant little tweets about her this morning , again, gave way to an onslaught through which HE looks terrible, and SHE is one step up the rung of becoming the third Clinton to run for President. DAMN

      Delete
    6. Z,
      I saw only this one Chelsea Tweet by Trump:

      If Chelsea Clinton were asked to hold the seat for her mother,as her mother gave our country away, the Fake News would say CHELSEA FOR PRES!

      Were there other Tweets?

      I haven't looked at Chelsea's Tweets. Yet.

      Delete
  9. What is the truth about Donald Trump, Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer?

    Stories are conflicting -- at this moment, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looks like the subject of the meeting was routine political dirt dishing.

      Collusion remains a wavy mirage in the fevered minds of the rage-filled lefties

      Delete
    2. Well, let's see...first it was "considering a Russian adoption"....then it was "oops...not THAT, you might saw we were just KIDDING!! Heh heh!"...then it was that"we were promised dirt on Hillary during the campaign but they didn't really have any dirt" so it doesn't matter that we tried to get dirt on Hillary from Russians.

      It's unreal.

      Delete
    3. My understanding is that he was lured by the Hillary dirt, but that was just to get his attention so he could be approached about the Magnitsky Act.
      Trump Jr. terminated the meeting.

      Delete
    4. Ed, then tell the media, okay?

      Delete
    5. Z,
      except she will win.

      You think so?

      It's scary to think that the electorate would vote her into office!

      Delete
    6. I'm not sure how a rational thinker would define the meeting as something other than 'collusion'. The key actors went to a meeting with a foreign contact, with the expectation of receiving damaging information on their political opposition. And then "omitted" [also known in some circles as "lies"] the foreign contact [yet again] on the security clearance forms....then have proffered evolving and contradictory statements as explanations.

      It's irrelevant as to who ended the meeting or the sauciness of the information.

      Delete
    7. "It's irrelevant as to who ended the meeting or the sauciness of the information."
      exactly

      Delete
    8. This is the point at which we must demand the strict definition of "collusion," as it exists in the fevered minds of the Trump haters (not including you, CI).

      Was it collusion with Vlad himself? With his agents? Exchanging information with known Russian agents? Meeting with any Russians on any topic?

      From an American legal and election law perspective, what is the difference between meeting with a Russian lawyer proffering dirt on Hillary, and actually receiving an entire dossier of dirt from a British muckraker?

      Both involve foreign influence, broadly interpreted, and I wonder if any applicable laws make the distinction between foreigners we like and ones we dislike.

      Is Russia a "hostile" power or "enemy" by any legal definition in any law that would apply to any of this?

      Is there anyone outside of Alan Dershowitz who can discuss and explain this issue rationally?

      Delete
    9. You make excellent points SF, but I'll definitely answer this one, from my perspective: Is Russia a "hostile" power or "enemy" by any legal definition in any law that would apply to any of this?

      Yes, by any reasonable standard. They're also acting in eery accordance with Putin's manifesto, outlined in Aleksander Dugin's “Foundations of Geopolitics”.

      Delete
    10. Thank you SF.
      This is not collusion. This might have been oppo-research.

      Delete
    11. Z: Would the "media" listen?
      They are not my measure of truth.

      Delete
    12. Well, Ed, you seemed to know more than they did, so....I thought you could help! :-)

      Delete
    13. AOW...scary to think the electorate would elect Chelsea? WHY? They're a different American today...they want goodies, she'll deliver goodies.
      The Republicans are (or used to be) the big boys in the room and are trying to get America's finances on line again....you can't take goodies away once people have them..
      \Unless you ARTICULATE WELL WHY our finances/budget need fixing....and so far, Mulvaney IS our man, and he IS probably the most articulate Republican connected to the WH, but.....
      people want their 'STUFF'.
      If I hear one more Republican say the immigrants come here for free speech, I'll scream..they're coming now for HANDOUTS. Once they're citizens, or even if they're not (!) you think they'll vote Republican?
      SOME DO...some understand America well enough, better than many libs, but not enough!

      Delete
    14. This is not collusion. This might have been oppo-research.

      Ed - OK, let's roll with this explanation; why then =, if this was above board....would Trump Jr. be compelled to lie about the foreign contact on his SF86 Security Clearance Questionnaire? Why would he have evolving explanations for the reason behind the meeting.

      Why is there a trend of Trump campaign/administration folks meeting with Russian contacts, and then "omitting" those contacts when applying for their security clearances? Activities that would lead to the suspension of my clearance [at least] and probable loss of my career.

      Must be nice to be the D.C. elite....

      - CI

      Delete
    15. Z,
      I said scary because I was thinking the long view: the future of our republic -- and the future of today's children.

      I agree with you that far too many in our electorate want goodies.

      This morning I heard about some kind of penalty for not using the E-ZPass Flex enough. WTH? The bureaucrats got the money for the passes required for the HOV lanes, but aren't satisfied with merely the money. They want to make sure that drivers carpool more. Save the planet!

      Delete
    16. Why is there a trend of Trump campaign/administration folks meeting with Russian contacts, and then "omitting" those contacts when applying for their security clearances? Activities that would lead to the suspension of my clearance [at least] and probable loss of my career.

      Must be nice to be the D.C. elite....


      How many clearance have you applied for over your career, CI? It's a rhetorical question, since this is Jrs. 1st trip with the paper.

      If your wife were filling out the paper, do you think she'd be able to name every foreigner SHE ever met or had a conversation with?

      Delete
    17. I had a hard time listing every country I'd ever been to.

      Delete
    18. ...and I certainly didn't have to list every foreigner I'd ever had contact with (TS, SBI application).

      Delete
    19. Section 20 is absolutely ridicous for anyone who ever had business dealings with people overseas. They'd have to include the Moscow telephone directory.

      Delete
    20. Section 19 doesn't apply to the bimbo he met with. Section 19 - Foreign Contacts
      Do you have, or have you had, close and/or continuing contact with a foreign national
      within the last seven (7) years with whom you, or your spouse, or cohabitant are bound by affection, influence, common interests,
      and/or obligation? Include associates as well as relatives, not previously listed in Section 18

      Delete
    21. If your wife were filling out the paper, do you think she'd be able to name every foreigner SHE ever met or had a conversation with?

      "Ever" might tax her memory....last June...would not. Especially with a veritable army of staffers at her disposal, who could easily provide or procure advice in filling out the SF86/EPSQ. I've applied for an initial and PR's every five years for going on ~29 years now, and haven't had any issues.

      Your opposition to Section 20 is noted.

      - CI

      Delete
    22. Yes, a conversation in June of 2016 arising from a Russian beauty pageant and Russian contacts established in 2013. I've got money that says Jr. listed the Agalarovs, both Aras and Emin on the form. They're the ones with Putin contacts. THEY are the contacts worthy of a report. And they are the one's who arranged the meeting. The nobody "messenger" lawyer was likely NOT.

      And ps, business people with profitable businesses aren't Govies. They don't employ "an army of staffers".

      Delete
    23. Really? A Presidential campaign apparatus doesn't have a multitude of staffers, well acquainted with the rules and apparats of government? Doesn't seem from his own e-mails, that his intent was to discuss beauty pageants.

      - CI

      Delete
    24. Nope, it was to discuss Oppo research. No multitude of staffers in the meeting, just Jared and the Campaign Mgr.

      Emin...

      Delete
    25. Did either of them report it on their forms?

      The conspiracy grows and grows until somebody uses Ockham's razor and concludes that a meeting with no Quid pro Quo explains the omission much more easily than the existence of a trilateral conspiracy excluding the President.

      Delete
    26. ...although I'll admit, any campaign worth its salt would separate the "dirty tricks" and "black" aspects of a campaign from the "legit" ones and the candidate.

      And please, don't tell me that Democrats NEVER do that kind of sh*t (I read "Primary Colours")

      Delete
    27. pps - Manafort took over the campaign from Lewandowski two weeks after the meeting @ Trump Tower and was fired in August 2016...two months later so he didn't likely apply for clearances

      Delete
    28. Your gonna need the quid pro quo to prove collusion. This meeting's a dry hole.

      Delete
    29. As Hamlet said, "Sure, he that made us with such large discourse,
      Looking before and after, gave us not
      That capability and god-like reason
      To fust in us unused. Now, whether it be
      Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
      Of thinking too precisely on the event,
      A thought which, quarter'd, hath but one part wisdom
      And ever three parts coward, I do not know
      Why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do;'
      Sith I have cause and will and strength and means
      To do't.
      "

      (motive opportunity intent capability)

      Delete
    30. No multitude of staffers in the meeting, just Jared and the Campaign Mgr.

      I was clearly referring to the wide range of assistance he would have at his disposal, were he to need it in filling out his EPSQ. Staffers, personal assistants, office managers....the people who help manage his daily routines and meetings.

      Delete
    31. I was clearly referring to the wide range of assistance he would have at his disposal, were he to need it in filling out his EPSQ. Staffers, personal assistants, office managers....the people who help manage his daily routines and meetings.

      And they would have learned of the meeting, how? Research into Rob Goldstone's Twitter feed?

      Delete
    32. The PA's , Staffers, etc... manage the candidate's affairs, not his son's.

      Delete
    33. PPPS - Which PA's and staffers helped you fill out your form?

      Delete
    34. Don Jr. doesn't rate a staff? Did he work in the mailroom of the Trump Corporation? Don didn't have assistants to manage his calendar, providing him with a direct resource in which no to "omit" any foreign contacts?

      Is that seriously what you're trying to peddle? You're going to have to do a lot better than that in your 'apology tour'.

      The names may change, but sycophants and myrmidons are always with us.

      Delete
    35. Which PA's and staffers helped you fill out your form?

      None. That's the point you can't seem to grasp.

      Delete
    36. I'm just now back online after a long doctor's appointment. CNN is salivating. Yet, I'm hearing "maybe," "possibly," "unsure if this was a crime," etc.

      Delete
    37. Rhona, Donald Trump Sr's secretary, wasn't in the meeting communication loop (per e-mails) and Manafort and Jarred. K were the only people the e-mail's were forwards "To".

      Delete
    38. It's probably not a crime, unless somebody made a point of the foreign contact "omission" from his EPSQ.

      Which won't happen because he's now part of the political elite. A caste above the rest of us.

      Delete
    39. Collusion isn't even a crime. Conspiracy, however, is.

      All evidence to date is circumstantial. The Dem's have got smoke, no fire.

      Delete
    40. Great....so, your contention is that nobody outside of the three principles had any ideas that this meeting took place. Small wonder Don Jr. couldn't keep a straight story about it. The "omission" still falls directly on him

      Delete
    41. They wouldn't even prosecute YOU for THAT omission. Given the ridiculous number of foreign contacts the Trumps have, the prospect of accurately filling out the form correctly would be like counting and naming all the leaves on a tree.

      Delete
    42. Don Jr. couldn't keep a straight story about it.

      Nobody keeps a story "straight" before the 4th variation. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Emerson.

      Delete
    43. The "omission" still falls directly on him

      NOT Jarred Kushner, too? Didn't HE have to fill out the forms?

      Delete
    44. AOW....you don't think our kids are going to get BETTER, do you? Seeking self reliance over freebies?

      Delete
    45. Didn't HE have to fill out the forms?

      Ah, but he already has issues with that, doesn't he? Does convoluting your own argument help you out much? Seems tiring.

      Delete
    46. Z,
      No, I don't -- for the most part, anyway.

      Only when the freebies run out will they seek independence because they will be forced to do so to "survive."

      Delete
    47. Z,
      The few who are already independence minded will become their leaders -- if there is to be "survival."

      Delete
    48. They wouldn't even prosecute YOU for THAT omission.

      Heh....thank you, but I'll not be taking advice regarding my clearance, from you. I've seen it happen. For unreported foreign contacts, unreported debt, spillage, etc.....

      Delete
    49. I share the pain of the EPSQ, but my understanding is Donald Jr, does not have a security clearance, since he's not a government official.

      Delete
    50. Which leaves the Jarred Kushner analogy about the Moscow phonebook...

      Delete
    51. Good point, I had read that he did...but perhaps not. If not, then the issue with foreign contact reporting is moot.

      - CI

      Delete
    52. Stanley,
      What is that analogy?

      Forgive me. I haven't yet finished my first cup of coffee.

      Delete
    53. P.S. for Don Jr anyway....not Kushner. How many unreported contacts is this now, for him?

      - CI

      Delete

    54. The emails were discovered in recent weeks by Mr. Kushner’s legal team as it reviewed documents, and the team amended his clearance forms to disclose it, according to people briefed on the developments, who like others declined to be identified because of the sensitive political and legal issues involved…

      The strain, though, exists on both sides. Mr. Kasowitz and his colleagues have been deeply frustrated by the president. And they have complained that Mr. Kushner has been whispering in the president’s ear about the Russia investigations and stories while keeping the lawyers out of the loop, according to another person familiar with the legal team. But one person familiar with Mr. Kasowitz’s thinking said his concerns did not relate to Mr. Kushner.

      The president’s lawyers view Mr. Kushner as an obstacle and a freelancer more concerned about protecting himself than his father-in-law, the person said. While no ultimatum has been delivered, the lawyers have told colleagues that they cannot keep operating that way, raising the prospect that Mr. Kasowitz may resign.


      How do we even know about these e-mails? They were leaked by Jarred Kushner's legal team so that they could "amend" his Security forms.

      Delete
    55. Jarred's omission became Don Jrs. nightmare.

      Delete
    56. @ AoW - My analogy is that for anyone with overseas business interests, filling out the forms would be akin to including the Moscow Phone directory.

      Delete
    57. I'm so glad that Jarred Kushner's Security forms are now "accurate"...

      Delete
    58. Fair analogy if the contacts were actually business related and in the past, not recent and related specifically to a campaign, during a campaign.

      - CI

      Delete
    59. ...until the next *drip* in the bureaucratic sink hits the basin.

      Delete
    60. Yes, CI, we learn so much vitally important national security information from these bureaucratic exercises...

      Delete
    61. ps - The questionaire doesn't make the campaign-business distinction. It demands ALL the data.

      Delete
    62. Of course, though I referred to the proffered analogy, not the EPSQ.

      - CI

      Delete
  10. "The delegations decide who will sit at the table if the President isn’t there, which can happen from time to time. And Ivanka belongs to the U.S. delegation," Merkel said, according to a Reuters report. "It’s well known that she works in the White House and is responsible for several initiatives."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. No big deal until as with everything, it was blown out of proportion.

      Delete
    2. Ed,
      There's a great deal of blowing things out of proportion these days. Wearisome, isn't it?

      Delete
    3. Yes. Even by people you'd expect to be on our side.

      Delete
    4. Ed,
      Leading me to think that they aren't really on our side.

      Whose side are they on?

      Delete
  11. Loving it.

    Lots of CNN Memes here also. - http://politicalclownparade.blogspot.com/2017/07/hey-cnn-were-flooding-internet-with.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kid,
      It really is hilarious that CNN frequently calls Trump thin-skinned, yet turn out to be thin-skinned themselves.

      Thanks for the tip about Political Clown Parade. I haven't been over there in a while. On my way right now!

      Delete
  12. This morning, I became curious enough to type in these search words, taken from the NYT July 10, 2017 article Trump Jr. Was Told in Email of Russian Effort to Aid Campaign: "russian government tried to sway election in favor of donald trump" (without the quotation marks).

    I found the following (dated December 1, 2016):

    Some of Trump’s foreign positions happen to dovetail with Putin’s. This includes Trump’s potential unwillingness to defend NATO allies, support for Russia’s takeover of Crimea in Ukraine, and willingness to consider lifting sanctions against Russia. He has also praised Putin as a "strong leader."

    But experts said this alone is not evidence that Putin is Trump’s puppeteer, or that he even wanted him as president.

    "Trump's comments on Russia have been very unusual, strangely at odds with the dominant view of both parties in the U.S.," Radnitz said. "But that's literally all we know."

    It’s no secret that Putin doesn’t like Clinton. She often tussled with Putin and his administration while serving as secretary of state, overseeing the so-called "Russian reset." But he also may not like Trump’s unpredictable nature, said Dmitry Gorenburg, a senior research scientist at CNA, a think tank.

    Putin believes Clinton stoked protests in Russia surrounding its 2011 elections. So if Putin did intentionally interfere in the U.S. election, it might have been to get back at Clinton rather than an attempt to prop up Trump, Gorenburg added.

    [...]

    Based on the evidence, it seems highly unlikely that actions by the Russian government contributed in any decisive way to Trump’s win over Clinton.


    Much more at the link.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The above article also includes this undated editor's note:

      Since we published this story, the question of Russia's role has come under additional questioning. The Washington Post reported Dec. 9 that the CIA concluded Russia meddled in the election with the intent to help Trump, rather than to disrupt the election generally. The New York Times produced a similar report. However, the Washington Post also reported that the FBI isn't as confident in this conclusion. These stories are all based on anonymous sources and cannot be independently verified.

      Delete
    2. I agree with your assessment, but I also don't think that it was Putin's goal, for Trump to win. His goal is to sow discord and de-legitimization in western political processes, and their military alliances.

      That Trump never seems to say a cross word about Russia's asymmetric war against the west, is certainly helpful...but only as collateral importance.

      - CI

      Delete
    3. CI,
      I see that we agree completely!

      I think that I know why Trump never seems to say a cross word about Russia's asymmetric war against the west.

      He's not tipping his hand. He's not burning the bridges of negotiation (deal making).

      In my view, the last thing that any sane person should want is open armed war with Russia. Furthermore, if open armed war should even be hinted at from the Oval Office, Putin would somehow turn that hinting so as to strengthen his obvious attempts at building a Russian bloc.

      We may be in a situation of "who blinks first."

      Delete
    4. The plausibility of that is marred not only by the score of previously unreported foreign contacts with Kremlin-linked Russians, but also his Administrations pushback against the recent Senate passed Russian sanctions.

      Putin doesn't want open conflict either, but he clearly is working to reacquire the former Soviet states [whether in whole or as a resurgent Warsaw Pact style bloc]. Neutering the western European nations domestically, and NATO militarily helps achieve this long term goal.

      No matter how you slice it, it seems suspicious for Mr. "America First" to appear so obsequious.

      - CI

      Delete
    5. An interesting statement to be considered; the author of the aforementioned Russian 'manifesto' - "Fundamentals of Geopolitics", posts to Facebook on November 13, 2016: “So. Washington is ours. Chișinău is ours. Sofia is ours. It remains but to drain the swamp in Russia itself.”

      Taken in isolation, it means nothing....but in the context of the manifesto, Dugin's stated support of Trump and his relationship with the Kremlin and Putin......it bears consideration. Where has the "liberal media" been on any of this?

      - CI

      Delete
    6. CI,
      Where have any media been on this?

      Honestly, until you mentioned Dugin, I'd never before heard of him.

      As for “So. Washington is ours. Chișinău is ours. Sofia is ours. It remains but to drain the swamp in Russia itself,", I don't discount disinformation. Do you? This is a propaganda war.

      Delete
    7. CI,
      PS: I will check with my Russia specialist about Dugin.

      Delete
    8. Never discount information, but I highly recommend reading at least online excerpts of Dugin's work. It's required reading at the Russian military and GRU academies.

      - CI

      Delete
    9. But then perhaps we all have our own private understanding of these things.

      Delete
    10. Any thought that Trump is a Russian stooge is immediately refuted by his offer to sell Europe natgas at the expense of the Russian economy.

      Delete
  13. My own observations tell me that CNN et al have moved from one target (DJT) to another (Paul Manafort) to another (Jared Kushner) to another (DJT, Jr.) in an effort to delegitimize the election of Donald Trump as POTUS by proving collusion with Russia to affect the outcome of the November 8 election.

    I am so tired of hearing the words "potential," "possible," etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's down to 4.57...A Facebook platform application named "Six Degrees" was developed by Karl Bunyan, which calculates the degrees of separation between different people. It had over 5.8 million users, as seen from the group's page. The average separation for all users of the application is 5.73 degrees, whereas the maximum degree of separation is 12. The application has a "Search for Connections" window to input any name of a Facebook user, to which it then shows the chain of connections. In June 2009, Bunyan shut down the application, presumably due to issues with Facebook's caching policy; specifically, the policy prohibited the storing of friend lists for more than 24 hours, which would have made the application inaccurate.[30] A new version of the application became available at Six Degrees after Karl Bunyan gave permission to a group of developers led by Todd Chaffee to re-develop the application based on Facebook's revised policy on caching data.[31][32]

      The initial version of the application was built at a Facebook Developers Garage London hackathon with Mark Zuckerberg in attendance.[33]

      Yahoo! Research Small World Experiment has been conducting an experiment and everyone with a Facebook account can take part in it. According to the research page, this research has the potential of resolving the still unresolved theory of six degrees of separation.[22][34]

      Facebook's data team released two papers in November 2011 which document that amongst all Facebook users at the time of research (721 million users with 69 billion friendship links) there is an average distance of 4.74.[35][36] Probabilistic algorithms were applied on statistical metadata to verify the accuracy of the measurements.[37] It was also found that 99.91% of Facebook users were interconnected, forming a large connected component.[38]
      Year Distance
      2008 5.28

      2011 4.74

      2016 4.57

      Distances as reported in Feb 2016 [36][39]

      Facebook reported that the distance had decreased to 4.57 in February 2016, when it had 1.6 billion users (about 22% of world population)

      Delete
    2. Farmer,

      Interesting, and not surprising. Thanks for the info.

      I have seen weird stuff pop up... I have gone through various iterations of my internet persona, and when my son got a new cell phone through my Dad's account, all of my previous persona's showed up as suggested when he linked to his google account.

      My real Facebook account and my Silverfiddle one constantly suggest friends and their friends from each other.

      Good thing I'm not doing anything nefarious: Google and Facebook (in addition to most people who blog here) know who I really am.

      Funny how what we all know and accept now would have made a great thriller plot for a hollywood movie 20 years ago.

      "The phone call is coming from the basement! Get out!"

      Delete
    3. I used to go through all sorts of machinations to hide my identity. I don't do so any longer. Too time consuming and nearly futile! Anonymity in the Digital Age is a mirage now.

      Delete
    4. Yes it is. I see on-line personas as nothing more than a casual shield from a garden variety nutball. I don't want somebody coming after me because I'd hate to have to shoot somebody.

      More disconcerting, thanks to your stupid, leaky government, China (and everybody on the dark web) has a complete list of everyone with a security clearance and all their personal details.

      Also, any enemy can also track down, to our addresses, any military person who served in any of our various wars.

      The tech savvy can track anything down. It is very common in the on-line gaming community. Somebody suffers a humiliating beatdown, they track down their tormentor and exact a little hacker's revenge.

      Delete
    5. We are Borg. You will be assimilated.

      Delete
    6. That's why I use my dad's name everywhere....

      Delete
    7. Ed,
      I am forced to use my dad's name on my Verizon cell phone, which I inherited from my father in 1998. The presentation of two death certificates was not enough to get the account changed to my name -- although there was no problem getting the billing address changed.

      Delete
  14. The NYT and CNN have already lost... they just got caught again making up shadowy conspiracy theories again... and the Libs still don't seem to get it...

    ReplyDelete
  15. Replies
    1. FT,
      On one level, I, too, am yawning about this DJT, Jr./Russia story.

      But on another level, I'm saying "Uh oh!" DJT has a lot of enemies in Washington -- both political parties. And the Enemedia, too, of course.

      DJT, Jr., is not on the White House staff. But Jared Kushner is, and he was also at the meeting with the Russian lawyer.

      Delete
  16. Did anybody else here watch CNN or MSNBC yesterday?

    Much salivating over "We gotcha, Trump!"

    The same is true at the WaPo and NYT, both yesterday and today.

    I also heard Tim Kaine declared the word "Treason!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I learned long ago that, when it comes to politics, the truth doesn't matter. Only perceptions matter!

      I repeat: ONLY PERCEPTIONS MATTER!

      Delete
    2. Which is exactly why I find watching CNN or even MSNBC from time to time, to see what perception Americans are getting when they rely on those for news, very important.

      Delete
    3. Z,
      If we watch -- and I do from time to time, primarily because I have a student of very liberal parents, and I'm teaching him both American Government and American History -- we must watch with a cynical eye.

      Sometimes it is difficult not to drink the Koolaid. Just sayin'.

      Delete
    4. Honestly, I think that goes without saying.
      The problem is sometimes the Koolaid isn't just Koolaid, sadly.
      But it's EXTREMELY important to understand what people are hearing.
      My disheartenment (and it is great today) comes when I see people say "Oh, you saw that on the liberal media" despite how the facts are there...it's not media slant, it's facts. We can't discount something simply because CNN presents it, though they have mischaracterized SO badly.
      For example, I just posted in a comment at my place that the Left's hammering Trump today on how he said "I have no dealings with Russia"...they did a long expose(Sorry I don't have an accent on my computer for the last e of that word!) saying TRUMP SAYS HE HAD NO DEALINGS WITH RUSSIA!!! (inferring a lie simply from the wording of the headline)...The truth is his son and daughter went there a few years back to consider building a Trump Tower in Russia but the recession hit so they decided against it...
      Because of that story, they're now saying he lies today about having had no Russia business dealings.
      I've done enough business to know that if a deal fell thru, I would say "No, I don't have dealings with that entity"...
      Yes, we have to be cynical, but we have to realize that Americans don't usually look beyond headlines "TRUMP DENIED DEALINGS WITH RUSSIA!" and they vote.

      Delete
    5. Z,
      Truth be told, I'm worn out with "Russia, Russia, Russia!" I prefer to check in on this:

      Donald Trump achievements.

      So much there that we hear zero about because of all the tabloid "reporting."

      It is but that Americans don't usually look beyond headlines. Nevertheless, DJT was elected on November 8, 2016.

      Meanwhile, the GOP has caved, for the most part, on ObamaCare. In my view, that is much more important that DJT, Jr.'s emails.

      Delete
    6. Z,
      The truth is his son and daughter went there a few years back to consider building a Trump Tower in Russia but the recession hit so they decided against it...
      Because of that story, they're now saying he lies today about having had no Russia business dealings.


      HELL'S BELLS! That was all hashed out before the election. Nothing-burger then, nothing-burger now.

      Delete
    7. Z,
      I've done enough business to know that if a deal fell thru, I would say "No, I don't have dealings with that entity"...

      Same here! I remember one such specific business deal Mr. AOW and I had that fell through back in the early 1980's.

      Delete

  17. Do these moronic leftists and their pawns in the media have a new narrative to pivot to?

    Or are they really just a working with a one trick pony, Russians, Russians, Russians!

    Think about this - Donand Trump Jr turned over his emails, and it clearly shows that he was being trueful. But the leftist insist he's lying.

    Hillary deleted hers. Smashed it with a Hammer, And bleached her server. And physically destroyed it. And the FBI Director said it wasn't intentional. Was he Crazy or was he paid off? Or was his arm twisted?

    Is there ONE honest leftist out there that actually sees the problem and double standard?

    Anyway, back to the point, will leftists start offering up ideas or discussing issues?

    Or are they so invested in their pack of lies that they can't turn back???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for the laundry list of discredited , old stories.

      Delete
  18. In the making of a dictator, the first thing is to discredited the media to it's gullible, uninformed supporters. We now have emails proving collusion by Trump's son and you still support him. That's the definition of stupid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about the Trump-Russia "golden showers" dossier? We have those "documents" too. What do THEY prove?

      Delete
    2. What about them? You seriously don't know wtf you're talking about, do you?

      Delete
    3. They prove you hypocrisy, of course, This Un!

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective