February 22, 2021 11:17 AM UTC

'Stop Sending Me Your Crap Lies'

• 2 Comments
• by: Jason Salzman

Cheryl: Go to hell.

CTR Editor Jason Salzman: Thanks for reaching out, Cheryl. Why are you so upset with our news site?

Cheryl: News? That is using the term loosely. Take me off your list of propaganda.

Jason: Can you point to a factual error? If so, we’ll correct, ASAP.

Cheryl: You wouldn’t know a fact if it slapped you in the face. Go ahead and pedal your propaganda to your liberal friends and take me off your list. If you were a newspaper I’d use your paper in the birdcage

—-

David: Eat shit you conspiracy spreading communist fuck! 

—-

Donna: Don’t send me any more of your trash.

Jason: Thank you, Donna. Why do you think this is trash. Do you see any errors? Thank you.

Donna: Yes, and I will put you in my SPAM folder

—-

Last year, thousands of people opted in to our CTR email list by clicking on online polls we promoted on Facebook.

Many get mad at us when they receive our weekly newsletter, not realizing they signed up for it. (You can sign up here.) It’s easy to unsubscribe from our email list, by clicking a link.

I try to respond to readers, and it’s worth doing, but….

Charles: Great news.  You woke cancel culture FASCISTS have now got someone [Boebert] to challenge your garbage liberal B.S.

Jason: Thank you for your input, Charles. I see we both hate fascists. Can you please point to any factual errors in our work? Thank you.

Charles: …In true woke cancel culture fashion, you have characterized a few people that crossed paths with Boebert as “radical right-wing extremists.” Of course, if you were even a little bit interested in the truth, a decent journalist wouldn’t be throwing out labels without backing it up with facts. This term is definitely subjective. For the sake of calling you people out on your bullshit, I’ll stand by my description of you as a woke cancel culture fascist.  Maybe balanced reporting may change my mind, but we won’t be holding our breath.

Jason: The term “radical right-wing extremists” was used because the people Boebert posed with were members of the three percenters militia, judging from the hand signs they made and the patches on their jackets. The group are not Nazis, but I think it’s fair to characterize it as we did. See here. Journalists struggle over labels, but they are a necessary part of reporting, because readers need to know what a group stands for, where it sits on the political spectrum. It’s always better to describe a group in detail, rather than label it, but that’s not always feasible, and in this case I think it’s justified. Readers can look it up if they want. I don’t think you’ve provided enough evidence to call me a cancel culture fascist.

Charles: Jason, you are in desperate need to have a rendezvous with the truth.  Living a lie, such as you people are, will not stand.  You know damn well that the only reason you posted this crap is to further your attempt to delegitimize this fairly elected Boebert.  Of course, you would never consider posting a real factual article along the same vein, such as the background of how Polis got to be governor, or the money and people behind Neguse and Crow, as well as the washed-up Hickenlooper.

—-

Michael: Back off with your BS stories about Boebert! She has more courage and cares more about the American people than any of the Liberal Politicians in the USA. Fair and unbias news coverage would be a breath of fresh air. Get off your “I’m holier than thou” platform!Thanks for reaching out, Michael.

Jason: Can you please provide an example of our BS? If you can cite a factual error, we will correct it. Thank you.

Michael: Don’t play games, Jason. The article clearly tries to discredit Bobert because they don’t agree with her conservative values. Get over yourself.

Jason: Thank you for your response. Please help me by pointing to a factual error.

Michael: Again, your game playing doesn’t make your publication correct. Back at you, point out to me factual information that it is correct and that her behavior is wrong. Otherwise, liberal publications like yours are designed to be divisive and definitely are offensive.

—

Gary: Stop sending me your crap lies!

Jason: Thanks for reaching out, Gary. Please point out any lie that you see in our work, along with a citation for accurate information. We will immediately correct it. Thanks.

—-

V.B.: bull shit.

Jason: Thanks for reaching out. Can you point to a factual error in our reporting? Thanks.

V.B.: Just another liberal rag.

—-

Is this worth my time?

Some of my conversations with our critics lead to reasonable exchanges and mutual education. I point out that we are openly progressive. They appreciate that, sometimes. It’s rare, and admittedly I have no examples here, but still.

I also think that a civil response to these kinds of comments has inherent value.

And somehow facts and sources have to gain more respect in political discourse. These are grains of sand in building a road in that direction.