|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
If you watch either CNN or Fox and believe the spin they put on articles why?
It has just become routine for me to not really conclude anything until I have read both. The line up of regular experts is just disgustingly lopsided at both. For instance. Everybody knows about climate change, and everybody knows that we have some kind of effect on our environment. You would have to be nuts to totally deny our effect and clearly nuts to think the sky is falling next decade.
Now come on people. CNN reports fire and brimstone shortly and FOX reports it is nothing to care about.
How can anyone read either one and believe it is fully accurate?
I don't watch either one. I don't have cable network programming. Oops! The only news with politics is my local San Diego channels that are of course network driven. I usually check Reuters, Washington Post, and Fox for internet articles. I feel I can gain perspective from those. I at times check the APnews too.
I used the word watch but I only check them online. No live TV in my house. Looks like you have a good combination.
I think where news comes from is always the key with political issues. The largest distribution of news is word-of-mouth in casual
conversations. For instance, I worked from noon to 11PM. I never saw TV news or had time for internet.
That is an interesting thought.I do notice my wife seems to get info that way.
So, we may discover a person's opinion is formed by the trust relationship of those word-of-mouth conversations. In other words I don't trust such and such, so I don't trust what s/he said which fosters an opinion, thus a position with a vote.
I don't know Tim. Gossip around the water cooler shaping our nation through vote? You have to admit that is scary.
I don't know about scary. I do know it is not uncommon for someone to say vote for ________ asked for or not. Wa-La word-of-mouth. Why, our Q&A & Forums are word-of-mouth. Social media in my view is word-of-mouth. It is not journalism.
No doubt you are right. Remember the telephone game? 10 people in a circle whisper into another's ear. By the time it gets around it is nothing like the original.But as I write this I think that the same is true with news. Very good point you make.
That is a good illustration to use for word-of-mouth. How many times I can think of someone telling me something at work. Then ask them where did that come from. The answer; the news. Usually to confirm was asking another person. Word-of-mouth.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.