"Alternative Facts"

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It's almost like the surrounding areas are dems pockets and trump voters coming to see wouldn't use metro! Weird how logic works isn't it

Sad state we're in these days. Lawyers cannot read

[VCR_CAT]

Don't push your luck twice. A detachment from reality tends to hurt

 

Will now indisputably prove this viral picture spread by media is not the full crowd, and I use CNN as my source

 

Except... that's very, very disputable. Specifically, those angles in the picture are very misleading; you realize how easy it is to make a sprout seem like a tall tree simply with the right angle with which to take the photo? Indisputable is comparing a photo taken from the same angle, or at the least a very equatable angle that shows just as much of the area; but these cropped pieces taken from ground-side or even just the stands make it difficult to really see how many people there are. If there's photographs taken at better angles, share those here. Otherwise, these are very far from being indisputable proof.

 

Onto the current topic at hand, this lends itself to one of my bigger concerns re: the Trump administration. During the election and after, Trump's overall reactions to negative coverage have been... nothing great. Taking the infamous Pussy Grab as an example, in the case of dirt being brought up, he jumps to the defensive or claims "FAKE NEWS!!" even when the news is simply just reporting on what he said. There was a real issue of fake news across Facebook and a lot of freelance blogs spreading gossip and shlock that people really shouldn't have eaten up (but they did), and he took that as a "Okay, so now whenever the news says something bad about me, I can just slam the media!" There are so many things he could've responded to in a far more mature and collected manner. He could've reacted to Pussy Gate with a simple apology, taking into account that the audio clip was years ago and say something along the lines of "I've made some mistakes and I'm going to work to better myself from them." In response to the higher numbers for Obama in '09 he could've congratulated Obama for making history as the first black president and acknowledged how big of an event that was, because as Jack said, that really was lightning in the bottle and it is unreasonable to expect to reach those numbers again. Frick, he could've just straight ignored a lot of negative coverage about himself, but instead he ends up being one of the most easily tilted presidents of this modern era.

 

Trump's reactions to negative coverage have been really bad; you could argue that not conceding or apologizing "is the mark of a man and it shows confidence." No, it doesn't. Being able to admit mistakes and own up to them is confidence; jumping to the defense and decrying anyone that says ill of you as lying is insecurity. If they really are lying, then you know the truth and show them they're wrong through example; don't yell or scream at them. His tweets and this behavior regarding this just shows a major lack of restraint, really doesn't say much good about his character. None of this is something I want to see in world leader.

 

My concerns with his constant attacks on the media simply because they didn't say good things about himself is that it makes me wonder what he's going to do regarding the media; what he'll do and if it'll infringe on the freedom of the press, or revoke that right entirely. That's not good, that's not what I want to see. Neither Trump nor anyone should actually really care about how many people saw the inauguration, because it doesn't really matter. But instead, letting this get to you and making these press announcements of "NO, YOU'RE WRONG" is going to make this far bigger than it really should be, which again is another big concern.

 

Okay, rant over.

[Wahrheit]

Sad state we're in these days. Lawyers cannot read

The point is Spicer lied.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

[spoiler=Now I suggest you read through the entire thing before you dismiss the information due to the source]https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5pezxn/fact_trumps_inauguration_was_the_most_watched/?ref=share&ref_source=link

 

Because it's not fair to bury sources in committee due to uncomfortable Truths

Except... that's very, very disputable. Specifically, those angles in the picture are very misleading; you realize how easy it is to make a sprout seem like a tall tree simply with the right angle with which to take the photo? Indisputable is comparing a photo taken from the same angle, or at the least a very equatable angle that shows just as much of the area; but these cropped pieces taken from ground-side or even just the stands make it difficult to really see how many people there are. If there's photographs taken at better angles, share those here. Otherwise, these are very far from being indisputable proof.

 

Onto the current topic at hand, this lends itself to one of my bigger concerns re: the Trump administration. During the election and after, Trump's overall reactions to negative coverage have been... nothing great. Taking the infamous Pussy Grab as an example, in the case of dirt being brought up, he jumps to the defensive or claims "FAKE NEWS!!" even when the news is simply just reporting on what he said. There was a real issue of fake news across Facebook and a lot of freelance blogs spreading gossip and shlock that people really shouldn't have eaten up (but they did), and he took that as a "Okay, so now whenever the news says something bad about me, I can just slam the media!" There are so many things he could've responded to in a far more mature and collected manner. He could've reacted to Pussy Gate with a simple apology, taking into account that the audio clip was years ago and say something along the lines of "I've made some mistakes and I'm going to work to better myself from them." In response to the higher numbers for Obama in '09 he could've congratulated Obama for making history as the first black president and acknowledged how big of an event that was, because as Jack said, that really was lightning in the bottle and it is unreasonable to expect to reach those numbers again. Frick, he could've just straight ignored a lot of negative coverage about himself, but instead he ends up being one of the most easily tilted presidents of this modern era.

 

Trump's reactions to negative coverage have been really bad; you could argue that not conceding or apologizing "is the mark of a man and it shows confidence." No, it doesn't. Being able to admit mistakes and own up to them is confidence; jumping to the defense and decrying anyone that says ill of you as lying is insecurity. If they really are lying, then you know the truth and show them they're wrong through example; don't yell or scream at them. His tweets and this behavior regarding this just shows a major lack of restraint, really doesn't say much good about his character. None of this is something I want to see in world leader.

 

My concerns with his constant attacks on the media simply because they didn't say good things about himself is that it makes me wonder what he's going to do regarding the media; what he'll do and if it'll infringe on the freedom of the press, or revoke that right entirely. That's not good, that's not what I want to see. Neither Trump nor anyone should actually really care about how many people saw the inauguration, because it doesn't really matter. But instead, letting this get to you and making these press announcements of "NO, YOU'RE WRONG" is going to make this far bigger than it really should be, which again is another big concern.

 

Okay, rant over.

Tell you what, you respond to chavez, and I'll respond to you. Let's not cut the discussion short

 

The media has been lying for years now VCR, what Spicer did was wrong. But someone needs to put them on notice.

 

Explain in detail how I faked those angles...I take offense to the accusation if it's there 

[Wahrheit]

Because it's not fair to bury sources in committee due to uncomfortable Truths

This topic was about the attendance, that post is about viewership. T_D is actually engaging in the same behavior they're accusing the media of. Nothing new about that, though.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The point is Spicer lied.

Yes, he should have second biggest, not biggest, and then congratulated President Obama. Oh well

[VCR_CAT]

[spoiler=Now I suggest you read through the entire thing before you dismiss the information due to the source]https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5pezxn/fact_trumps_inauguration_was_the_most_watched/?ref=share&ref_source=link

 

 

This is pretty important, taking into account the livestream viewer base. My only main concern with this data is that sites such as Youtube and DEFINITELY Facebook can be very, very lenient on what constitutes a "view". In Facebook's case, it counts as anyone that scrolls by a video and it plays for 3 seconds (automatically) without any audio. They count that as a view. Youtube I'm also not sure if they constitute someone as a view if they watched the whole thing, or if that large number is taken just when there was the highest number of people watching. And then there's Twitter that posts livestreams of major events on your feed that will play automatically; do those constitute views?

 

There's a lot of gray area, is what I'm saying, and some specificity would be nice.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

This topic was about the attendance, that post is about viewership. T_D is actually engaging in the same behavior they're accusing the media of. Nothing new about that, though.

Hmm so we're not disagreeing with the premise of the post? Excellent. Mea culpa. Trump 17 did not beat Obama 09. Quite likely it beat Obama 13. Spicer lied and was wrong. Media also regular lies and need to be taken out back and put down. Did I miss anything?

 

Trump should have reacted better. I wish we could see more of the president like this:

 

[senorchavez]

This topic was about the attendance, that post is about viewership. T_D is actually engaging in the same behavior they're accusing the media of. Nothing new about that, though.

But the original source in your opening post referred to the viewership as well, implying that Spicer lied about it.

[Wahrheit]

But the original source in your opening post referred to the viewership as well, implying that Spicer lied about it.

No, it talks about "quantifying crowds."

[senorchavez]

This is pretty important, taking into account the livestream viewer base. My only main concern with this data is that sites such as Youtube and DEFINITELY Facebook can be very, very lenient on what constitutes a "view". In Facebook's case, it counts as anyone that scrolls by a video and it plays for 3 seconds (automatically) without any audio. They count that as a view. Youtube I'm also not sure if they constitute someone as a view if they watched the whole thing, or if that large number is taken just when there was the highest number of people watching. And then there's Twitter that posts livestreams of major events on your feed that will play automatically; do those constitute views?

 

There's a lot of gray area, is what I'm saying, and some specificity would be nice.

https://productforums.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/youtube/18PqEHG7IfY

 

Here you go, this is but one of the many responses about what constitutes a view.

No, it talks about "quantifying crowds."

my bad, I mistook "from around the globe" as via the internet as well.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Yes, he should have second biggest, not biggest, and then congratulated President Obama. Oh well

Well, third.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Well, third.

2nd, he's def ahead of 2013

[Wahrheit]

2nd, he's def ahead of 2013

Prove it?

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

2nd, he's def ahead of 2013

You already said Reagan beat him.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You already said Reagan beat him.

In viewership, yes, attendance no

Nobody has beaten 80 Reagan in viewship yet

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Ah, misread.

 

In any case, I think the biggest issue is with Kellyanne Conway. While Spicer lied, she basically said "facts don't matter" which is scary.

 

There is definitely a way to quantify crowds. It is called numbers.

 

I don't know why they let her near microphones at this point.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Prove it?

He had ~900k at 11:04, more showed up. Chances are likely he crossed the 2013 mark even if you discredit the scaling I did to show his speech time crowd was huge

 

We'll know conclusively in a week or so

 

Edit: I'm honestly not fully sure why people are bitter about this. Local demographics greatly favor Obama. A funking 102 year old man came to see Trump from Az. 900k, likely a 1M is a ton. Idgi

 

Ah, misread.

In any case, I think the biggest issue is with Kellyanne Conway. While Spicer lied, she basically said "facts don't matter" which is scary.

There is definitely a way to quantify crowds. It is called numbers.

I don't know why they let her near microphones at this point.

Same reason we let people near the mike after telling us we could keep our doctor and plan? Talented liars go far

 

You have to scale to count here. And the ugly forcast made arial trafficking hard

[Wahrheit]

He had ~900k at 11:04, more showed up. Chances are likely he crossed the 2013 mark even if you discredit the scaling I did to show his speech time crowd was huge

 

We'll know conclusively in a week or so

 

Edit: I'm honestly not fully sure why people are bitter about this. Local demographics greatly favor Obama. A funking 102 year old man came to see Trump from Az. 900k, likely a 1M is a ton. Idgi

 

Same reason we let people near the mike after telling us we could keep our doctor and plan? Talented liars go far

 

You have to scale to count here. And the ugly forcast made arial trafficking hard

Under the proposal endorsed by the author of that quote, you could keep your doctor. The GOP changed that. The Democrats didn't change who attended Trump's inauguration.

 

The point is Spicer lied on a number of fronts and didn't allow press questions.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. There's lies all around. Frankly doesn't matter to me one way or another. But I love how this is sucking up all the media attention and they didn't get to the controversial thing he dropped. *shrugs* ohhhh well

[Wahrheit]

"Spicer lied. Here's proof."

 

"Okay, but what if he didn't?"

 

Come on, Winter.

[Sunshine Jesse]

I can't help but think that this is a co-ordinated attempt by the MSM to troll Donald Trump by taking shots at his fragile ego

[VCR_CAT]

Tell you what, you respond to chavez, and I'll respond to you. Let's not cut the discussion short

 

The media has been lying for years now VCR, what Spicer did was wrong. But someone needs to put them on notice.

 

Explain in detail how I faked those angles...I take offense to the accusation if it's there 

 

The angles aren't "faked", the photos aren't "faked", I'm saying the photos were taken from angle that's closer to the ground and more parallel with the horizon. This means that crowds are going to be in front of each other in the camera's perspective, and especially with how these are cropped shots of sections of the ground, they don't show the whole picture. As well, 2D images have a poor sense of depth (compare the CNN shot to the other shot you just posted; how close to the scaffolding towers holding the speakers are in comparison to each other in either photo) and you'll see that a different angle of perspective can really change how something can look. I'm not saying the photos were faked, I'm saying you could be selecting specific photos to make it look like the narrative you wish to spin is true while the other's false, but there's a lot of factors that keep your evidence far from indisputable. A highly exaggerated example would be if I took a cheeseburger, set it on a table, and took a close-up shot with Big Ben in the background and declared WORLD'S LARGEST CHEESEBURGER; DWARF'S MONUMENT! The photo wouldn't be faked at all; I would just be playing with angles and perspective to make one thing look a certain way. People do this all the time with the oh-so-clever photo of one person in the foreground holding their hand and another person in the background standing in a place to make themselves look small and standing in a giant person's hand. Etc. Silly stuff like that. Angles and perspective matter in photography, and if you want your evidence to be indisputable, then show a photograph taken from the same angle as the CNN one showing  a different turn-out. Otherwise, it's pretty dang disputable.

 

You'll need to be more specific on what you mean by "chavez". A simple google search turns up a lot of results ranging from the 64th president of Venezuela to bands, and I don't really see how either is relevant to the discussion.

 

Regarding the media "lying for years", I'm not disputing that the media has lied in the past. Tabloids have spewed bullshit for years, and that's just what happens. Freedom of the press means the freedom to lie. Freedom of the press means "the right to publish newspapers, magazines, and other printed matter without governmental restriction and subject only to the laws of libel, obscenity, sedition, etc. It basically means that so long as what the press is doing isn't illegal, they should be free to print it. It's up to the consumer to be critical of the news they consume and to be able to research matters if they seem suspicious. Nobody should just be reflexively digesting everything they see as true without some rational consideration.

 

What Trump wants to do, and is already starting to do, is control how the media sees his administration, and the fact that it starts with Spicer using "alternate facts" and information contrary to the truth is far more concerning than some news outlets not getting everything right all the time. This kind of behavior is something I'd expect to see from a dictator; someone controlling the information of the government's actions rather than letting the press ask their questions and get their answers. I'm not saying Trump is a dictator, and I was never one to say that he's going to be the new Hitler. But right now, this isn't sitting well with me and I don't like the idea that the new President might go as far as to restrict news outlets from only publishing information that he wants them to publish in the way that he likes. That's not how a free country is supposed to operate. Trump's whole attitude towards the press and media despite how credible they've been does not give any sort of indication that he's just going to go around with a "transparent" and "open" administration. Quite the opposite; Spicer is giving lots of signs that this administration will not only be opaque af, but will have no problem shilling out completely false information as fact regardless of the evidence.

 

EDIT: from someone with more direct experience with government administration: https://twitter.com/rascouet/status/823035518313267202

what Spicer did wasn't just lying; it's giving a lot of bad signs for what this term is going to look like.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I can't help but think that this is a co-ordinated attempt by the MSM to troll Donald Trump by taking shots at his fragile ego

Vice Versa, it really ate into the coverage of the Woman's March

Freedom of the Press does not imply freedom to lie VCR, holy sheet. Anyway Chavez is a user on YCM that you addressed. 

 

 

Is this a better shot for you?

 

Kellyanne was wrong, Spicer was wrong, Media was wrong, I was right, there were a sheet ton of people there.

 

Trump isn't going far enough though, he needs to bait the media into a high-profile slander case, then use that as a springboard to take this abomination out

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan

 

We need some accountability in this industry finally, and for once the dems agree with me thanks to their recent fake news jabroniing spree

[VCR_CAT]

Is this a better shot for you?

 

Kellyanne was wrong, Spicer was wrong, Media was wrong, I was right, there were a sheet ton of people there

 

What picture do you think I was talking about when I said "doubling from shaky cam" and mentioning the speaker scaffolding? Holy crap dude, actually read the posts before you just barf something out.