Fighting for Facts in the Media – The Daily Signal Vs. NPR

Why we need a global, decentralized, non-governmental, non-bank, deflationary currency:

There was never really any mystery about how the new Trump administration was going to handle how it treats the press, or in how it tells its side of things to the American people. From day one, Trump has run a fact-free campaign. Its not that he doesnt sometimes have the facts on his side, its that he totally unconcerned about whether he does or doesnt. Whatever the facts are, he simply doubles down on what hes saying and smears people who disagree with him or dare to state the facts.

Therefore, the outrage this weekend over the Trump administrations claim that massive numbers of people attended the inauguration could be instantly and from multiple sources, be contradicted was totally predictable. Nor was Sean Spicers attack on the press during the very first Trump administration press conference, in which he didnt even take questions.

The most telling, though, was Kellyanne Conways comments on Meet the Press that Spicer, and by extension, the administration has given alternative facts.

Another term for an alternative fact, of course, would be lie.

Were going to be hearing a lot of alternative facts, or lies, out of the administration, congress, and a plethora of news media in the next four years, and it will be even more crucial to keep their feet to the factual fire.

With this thought in mind, I was amused to find an article on the Daily Signal calling for the de-funding of NPR due to its liberal biased reporting. The article predominantly attacks NPR for reporting with what it calls a radical-liberal slant and for failing to get a conservative opinion on each of its pieces.

Because of my interest in producing this site, I read a lot of news from a variety of outlets. Left, right, or center, I will always choose the source that is basingits reporting, to the best of its ability, on facts.

Lets see how the Daily Signal stacks up:

//mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-signal/

Of particular note, see the notation of how factual their reporting is at the bottom. They have a mixed relationship with the truth. What this means is, they have an ideological bias and will provide alternate facts (lie) if the actual facts (truth) dont line up with their narrative. Further, they are run by the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank which itself has a loose relationship with the truth.

Now lets look at NPR:

//mediabiasfactcheck.com/npr/

They do indeed have a liberal bias according to this data, but as you can see, they seem generally to rein themselves in to the facts.

Radical conservatism, but radical) has co-opted the commonsense wisdom of the real conservatism and has been waging a 50-year war on the truth. The Trump administration has pushed this to a new level.

Rather than de-funding NPR, we should be making sure that we are holding all our news outlets to that one standard – the truth.

The fact of the matter is that we are going to be living in an alternative fact environment for the foreseeable future.
Bitcoin, though, is a system of money that doesnt rely on anyones interpretation of what the facts are. It is money based on an unchangeable ledger that is completely controlled by the individual who owns them. The dollar is at the mercy of the government, and the banks can always lock you away from your own funds. I side with verifiable facts, and verifiable money.