Difference between revisions of "Talk:Double standard"

Revision as of 08:43, September 20, 2015

The New York Times published only two articles about the Pol Pot regime and its mass murders ?????????? Does anybody believe this ??? This statement should be removed. Maupiti 15:31, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Good point. And the claim is so specific that I can't help but wonder where it originated in the first place. --DHayes 15:47, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Try not to split the discussion:

• I wondered where this claim comes from and whether it's true since it's extremely specific and sounds unlikely.

You can either:

1. Try to refute the claim, if you want to assert that the liberal press is not using a double standard on communist and authoritarian governments; or,
2. Investigate the claim yourself, if you are interested in the truth about liberal media bias.

You can help this website more by doing the latter, but that assumes you actually care about (1) what is true and (2) providing trustworthy information to the general public. If you have bias, then this is not a task for you. --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:27, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I was under the impression that those who make the claim should back them up with sources. I'm sorry, I currently don't have the time or the resources to go through a few years of newspaper archives (is that archive even online?). But you made the claim, so you already did the research, right? Surely it's an easy feat for you to prove your claim since you arrived at the conclusion that the NYT published exactly two articles about this.

I asked you for help because it's a very bold and specific claim that's extremely hard to prove or disprove from scratch. You on the other hand are the guy who put it in, so you either made stuff up or made research that proves your point. Which one is it? --DHayes 09:37, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Keep up the good work Ed! Orrelon 09:28, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

You know, Ed, we aren't asking much, just tell us where you got those numbers from, I've tried using a google search, and I can't find anything like it, so, if you don't mind putting your sources. DLerner 09:45, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

found something, scroll down to table 4.1, for 1976 the NYT reported 4 times on Cambodia. don't know the accuracy about Chile though (or the accuracy of the study) DLerner 09:52, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I did a quick search of the New York times website [1], and it turns that they have 112 articles with "Pol Pot" in the headline written since 1980, 14 of them on the front page. Blinkadyblink 13:14, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I feel this page itself is a double standard, as it implies that no conservatives anywhere have any double standards. There are some fringe conservatives that do the same thing (Remember that school that banned the showing of Obama's back to school speech, but was willing to bus it's students to see a speech given by bush?). This page is heavily biased, which is what Conservapedia was created to eliminate. While it may be true one party has more double standards than another, we should not try to present it as something only liberals do. It's double standards like this that reduce wikipedia's credibility, so why do we re-create them here?

Double standards are central to the liberal belief system, as oil is to gasoline. Sure, oil can be found in other materials also, but that doesn't mean an entry about oil should talk as much about them as it should about gasoline.--Andy Schlafly 16:59, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

Liberals demand conservatives defend Obama

The media is now regularly demanding that conservatives defend Obama on a variety of issues.[2] It's a strikingly odd trend. They also demanded Walker defend Obama after Giuliani commented on Obama's obvious lack of patriotism.[3] Isn't Obama still proud of attending the sermons of Jeremiah "God damn America" Wright? What kind of "patriot" would give a tribute to Wright after that? PeterKa (talk) 21:03, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

It's a liberal double standard. Why aren't liberals demanding that Obama defend conservatives??--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

The typical liberal opinion peice on these issues does not attempt to argue that Obama really is a Christian, patriot, or whatever. They explain that the issue is out-of-bounds for us little people to discuss, as if someone appointed them discussion umpires. PeterKa (talk) 03:48, 20 September 2015 (EDT)