the opinions of people who care whether she's "white" are insignificant
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Beseeched1 (Long Spike)
These biased opinion channels are based solely on that - insignificant crap to rile up their gullible audience.
+1
+3
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000 (Old Spike)
who's this guys target audience?
her name was Nasim Aghdam. you could put in her in clown makeup and nobody is going to think she was "white"
if he's talking skin colour, she's white. if her name was natalia aghdamlov there would be no doubt in her skin colour.
her skin complexion is lighter than the fake silicon breasts vest she's got on, she's white.
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Did you watch the video sal?
Tim's target audience are people who dine a la carte, who value objectivity, who recognize the damage tribal journalism is doing to our society, and actual journalists like myself. What I found entertaining about this video was how Tim rips this idiot Mashable reporter to aboslute shreds.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000 (Old Spike)
yea i watched it. 15 minutes of how to donate to his patreon, not being sure on wether or not the whitening was intentional or not, some shit about the beast and asking to viewers to leave comments on your opinion of the intention. thats not journalism, it's speculation. if it had anything to do with a newspaper it would be in the "letters to the editor" section with a disclamer from the paper stating opinions are not shared by the paper.
i thought journalism dealt with facts. like persian being more or less a language spoken officially in 3 different countries. people of those area could be considers "white" in complexion. aka
the fact that she had a gun, making her atleast a us citizen. if she was iranian, he should have called her an iranian-american or whatever-american.
if i was a journalist like tom and i guess you, i could go off on a rant how tom's video's are stretched out so they are over 10 minutes so he can put more ads into it. i could then let the audience know that i run an adblocker so i have no way of proving it. i would then show how most of his videos are just over 10 minutes and show articles about youtube 10 minutes bullshit. but also reiterating that i can't prove anything. i would then pivot to the youtube button he's got on the left side of the wall. i would point out that it looks gold, but to be gold you need like a million suscribers, could be the reflection from the flag, but against stating i can't prove anything, finishing with a reminder to donate 10.00 a month to my patreon account, suscribe and hit the bell and leave a comment on what you think. but i would take 17 minutes and 53 seconds to relate this info.
so am i a journalist now? i didnt go to school to be one but i can call myself one. kinda like cesar and dogs. i grew up around newspapers.
+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
You completely missed the whole point of the video, which I actually believe you do intentionally. The video is a damning critique of bad journalism - you're focused on the race when Tim is talking about bad journalism. If you had studied journalism in college or university, or had taught yourself (which is totally legit), you would be able to recognize that if it wasn't intentional it was definitely "really bad journalism" - a ridiculously embarrassing error. I was taught that just getting someone's name wrong in an article is grounds for immediate dismissal. His name is Tim by the way.
No, you're not a journalist now. Maybe go study it, and then work for a number of MSM outlets, including Vice, for several years and then strike out on your own as you realize the only way it's going to get done properly is if you do it yourself. Then you'd be like Tim. Or you could go the easy route and just be another really bad journalist, and join any number of MSM outlets - they are dying and desperate for people willing to work for pennies and you could probably just fake your way into some kind of journalistic position (fake the resume, whole thing - they won't look hard at it really). Partisan conflict sells so you wouldn't have to come off as objective, even when reporting the news. Whatever the paper's political bias is, just do that, and you'll do fine.
One of the things any good journalist should be doing right now is pointing out bad journalism. The ombudsmen are dead, and you need to stop drinking.
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000 (Old Spike)
i got everything he said. i looked into archeived and cached instagram pages, i reversed image searched the green eyed photo, i looked into mashable and tim.
this is what i found. 2 different caches of her instagram page, its her photo she uploaded to instagram on july 26 2017
http://archive.is/BGydQ
http://archive.fo/d8PT5
you like apples?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Raining Blood (Long Spike)
bump
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Grothesk (Long Spike)
Agreed with Raining Blood. It very much looks like the "white" images that Tim Pool complained about legitimately came from her own Instagram...which very much undercuts his entire premise.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
I think you are all assuming Tim is making the same accusations as the Twitter user who was arguing with the Mashable journalist. You're all missing Tim's focus on the profile photos - the ones the shooter was using on the day of and in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. His point is that the guy didn't pull the photo he used for the article from one of her front-facing profile photos. He went digging and pulled an altered version he had to know was modified and used that one instead. Tim invites viewers to discuss "why?" in the comment section. Tim says the only thing he can say with certainty is that it was bad journalism.
Tim was unable to find the shooter's archived Instagram post of the "green eye" photo, and was only able to find the photo by itself at an Instagram aggregator site. Sal WAS able to find the "green eye" version at a different aggregator site that shows the full postings to Intagram. It showed she posted it in July 2017 as one of many Instagram photos over the course of the year, actually proving Tim's only real accusation correct: that the guy went digging and used a heavily altered photo instead of her normal profile photo or any other photo than a modified one. It probably really was the really bad work of a journalist who used poor judgment - maybe he thought it would look "cool" or draw interest if the photo for his article looked really different from everyone else's.
Tim is a self-taught journalist, like Sal hopes to be one day. He is obviously not the best journalist on YouTube or elsewhere (he shouldn't have said "Well, isn't that convenient" regarding the accounts being deleted) - personally I think he's a bit lacking intellectually. But he's actually devoted to objective journalism - the stubborn pursuit of it as a core operating principle of the profession. Sal, I've forwarded your links to Tim for his information, so he can see the actual Instagram post that she made of the photo. Also I agree that Tim's videos and monologues sometimes go on longer than necessary. I don't care - integrity has to trump polish these days.
+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000 (Old Spike)
3:17 "why did mashable run a photo of a woman who was persian with brown eyes, with her skin lighted and her eyes turned green. and than caption it to say that it came from instagram when it probably didnt?"
4:33 "now that very convenient, beacause you can't actually check too see if Johnny was telling the truth, he claims the image came from instagram. now the pages are deactivated, you can't check. fortunatly i began to archive her pages after the shooting, because i believe they would be taken down...."
11:00 "if a twitter user is doing a better job than you, you probably shouldnt have a job in the first place"
12:34 "how hard is it to do a google search, to find this womans website, to find pictures of her. it took me only about 10 minutes to find all her social media accounts, and i'll be honest. i do this for a living. i know how to find alot more than just her social media accounts. i found out her families information... journalists should be able to dig thru information, determin relevent to the public and publish facts"
tim has 30k views on this video. do you think i'm the only person out of them that was able to find her cached instagram account or do you think the 30k are not interested in knowing it was her photo and would prefer to think mashable doctored and posted it.
i posted the links to the pages in the youtube comments yesterday, today they are deleted. a proper journalist would post a correction and thank sources.
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Comments posted with links in them are automatically sent to the spam tab, and most creators with busy YouTube channels apply a blanket delete policy for anything marked as spam. I don't - I examine each one individually and make a decision, but larger channels don't have that luxury. I sent your links directly to Tim.
You left out the part where Tim ALSO shows that an Instagram aggregator returns the doctored photo, just not the post. Tim might have been too dense to realize the disparity in search results between Twitter user and Mashable reporter could be easily explained by how Google tailors search results. The Mashable reporter's search brings the modified version up first in his results because he had already been there to grab it. Google behaves similarly with me - things I've looked at most often come up first in the results when searching on images. Google always tries to tailor search results to whatever it knows about your past browing activity. Now it's possible the Twitter user was fudging his own search results to fuck with the Mashable reporter, but the more likely answer, and I would have liked a better analysis of this, is that it's just how the algorithm works.
You also keep missing Tim's focus on the profile photos - you even have it in your quote above and have still apparently missed it. The only thing Tim is actually trying to prove here with certainty is that the reporter had to dig to find that photo.
I think most of the 30K understand the point Tim was making, and my guess is some, like you, have found the actual Instagram post and have tried to notify Tim. Are you in agreement that this Mashable reporter deliberately used a modified photo of the YouTube shooter for his article? Yes or no? Do you understand why that is so verboten?
I've already agreed Tim should not have said "Now that's convenient". I also agree with you that he shouldn't have said "probably not" - also bad would have been "maybe it did" or "maybe it did, maybe it didn't" - this adds nothing to the point he's making. Dude - understand that I understand that he's not polished and can be a bit unimaginative (concrete) in his analysis sometimes. I like the fact that he makes striving for objectivity his primary professional goal. Some accuse him of having a left-wing bias, but I don't see that at all. He's more objective than some actor on TV reading a script. You prefer actors reading scripts over unpolished Tim?
+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
ninjzz3.0 (Short Spike)
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Every tribe wants to make her a member of the tribe they perceive as the great enemy.
+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
hellyeah (Old Spike)
perzian tribe
+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
thegent (Old Spike)
arent arabs and all those stan people considered white?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal (Old Spike)
It's a real shame she ended up with mental health issues because her body was bang'n
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Grothesk (Long Spike)
You can't have *both* a mentally healthy woman AND a bang'n bod. You have to choose.
Comments
(Old Spike)
the opinions of people who care whether she's "white" are insignificant
(Long Spike)
These biased opinion channels are based solely on that - insignificant crap to rile up their gullible audience.
(Old Spike)
who's this guys target audience?
her name was Nasim Aghdam. you could put in her in clown makeup and nobody is going to think she was "white"
if he's talking skin colour, she's white. if her name was natalia aghdamlov there would be no doubt in her skin colour.
her skin complexion is lighter than the fake silicon breasts vest she's got on, she's white.
(Old Spike)
Did you watch the video sal?
Tim's target audience are people who dine a la carte, who value objectivity, who recognize the damage tribal journalism is doing to our society, and actual journalists like myself. What I found entertaining about this video was how Tim rips this idiot Mashable reporter to aboslute shreds.
(Old Spike)
yea i watched it. 15 minutes of how to donate to his patreon, not being sure on wether or not the whitening was intentional or not, some shit about the beast and asking to viewers to leave comments on your opinion of the intention. thats not journalism, it's speculation. if it had anything to do with a newspaper it would be in the "letters to the editor" section with a disclamer from the paper stating opinions are not shared by the paper.
i thought journalism dealt with facts. like persian being more or less a language spoken officially in 3 different countries. people of those area could be considers "white" in complexion. aka
the fact that she had a gun, making her atleast a us citizen. if she was iranian, he should have called her an iranian-american or whatever-american.
if i was a journalist like tom and i guess you, i could go off on a rant how tom's video's are stretched out so they are over 10 minutes so he can put more ads into it. i could then let the audience know that i run an adblocker so i have no way of proving it. i would then show how most of his videos are just over 10 minutes and show articles about youtube 10 minutes bullshit. but also reiterating that i can't prove anything. i would then pivot to the youtube button he's got on the left side of the wall. i would point out that it looks gold, but to be gold you need like a million suscribers, could be the reflection from the flag, but against stating i can't prove anything, finishing with a reminder to donate 10.00 a month to my patreon account, suscribe and hit the bell and leave a comment on what you think. but i would take 17 minutes and 53 seconds to relate this info.
so am i a journalist now? i didnt go to school to be one but i can call myself one. kinda like cesar and dogs. i grew up around newspapers.
(Old Spike)
You completely missed the whole point of the video, which I actually believe you do intentionally. The video is a damning critique of bad journalism - you're focused on the race when Tim is talking about bad journalism. If you had studied journalism in college or university, or had taught yourself (which is totally legit), you would be able to recognize that if it wasn't intentional it was definitely "really bad journalism" - a ridiculously embarrassing error. I was taught that just getting someone's name wrong in an article is grounds for immediate dismissal. His name is Tim by the way.
No, you're not a journalist now. Maybe go study it, and then work for a number of MSM outlets, including Vice, for several years and then strike out on your own as you realize the only way it's going to get done properly is if you do it yourself. Then you'd be like Tim. Or you could go the easy route and just be another really bad journalist, and join any number of MSM outlets - they are dying and desperate for people willing to work for pennies and you could probably just fake your way into some kind of journalistic position (fake the resume, whole thing - they won't look hard at it really). Partisan conflict sells so you wouldn't have to come off as objective, even when reporting the news. Whatever the paper's political bias is, just do that, and you'll do fine.
One of the things any good journalist should be doing right now is pointing out bad journalism. The ombudsmen are dead, and you need to stop drinking.
(Old Spike)
i got everything he said. i looked into archeived and cached instagram pages, i reversed image searched the green eyed photo, i looked into mashable and tim.
this is what i found. 2 different caches of her instagram page, its her photo she uploaded to instagram on july 26 2017
http://archive.is/BGydQ
http://archive.fo/d8PT5
you like apples?
(Long Spike)
bump
(Long Spike)
Agreed with Raining Blood. It very much looks like the "white" images that Tim Pool complained about legitimately came from her own Instagram...which very much undercuts his entire premise.
(Old Spike)
I think you are all assuming Tim is making the same accusations as the Twitter user who was arguing with the Mashable journalist. You're all missing Tim's focus on the profile photos - the ones the shooter was using on the day of and in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. His point is that the guy didn't pull the photo he used for the article from one of her front-facing profile photos. He went digging and pulled an altered version he had to know was modified and used that one instead. Tim invites viewers to discuss "why?" in the comment section. Tim says the only thing he can say with certainty is that it was bad journalism.
Tim was unable to find the shooter's archived Instagram post of the "green eye" photo, and was only able to find the photo by itself at an Instagram aggregator site. Sal WAS able to find the "green eye" version at a different aggregator site that shows the full postings to Intagram. It showed she posted it in July 2017 as one of many Instagram photos over the course of the year, actually proving Tim's only real accusation correct: that the guy went digging and used a heavily altered photo instead of her normal profile photo or any other photo than a modified one. It probably really was the really bad work of a journalist who used poor judgment - maybe he thought it would look "cool" or draw interest if the photo for his article looked really different from everyone else's.
Tim is a self-taught journalist, like Sal hopes to be one day. He is obviously not the best journalist on YouTube or elsewhere (he shouldn't have said "Well, isn't that convenient" regarding the accounts being deleted) - personally I think he's a bit lacking intellectually. But he's actually devoted to objective journalism - the stubborn pursuit of it as a core operating principle of the profession. Sal, I've forwarded your links to Tim for his information, so he can see the actual Instagram post that she made of the photo. Also I agree that Tim's videos and monologues sometimes go on longer than necessary. I don't care - integrity has to trump polish these days.
(Old Spike)
3:17 "why did mashable run a photo of a woman who was persian with brown eyes, with her skin lighted and her eyes turned green. and than caption it to say that it came from instagram when it probably didnt?"
4:33 "now that very convenient, beacause you can't actually check too see if Johnny was telling the truth, he claims the image came from instagram. now the pages are deactivated, you can't check. fortunatly i began to archive her pages after the shooting, because i believe they would be taken down...."
11:00 "if a twitter user is doing a better job than you, you probably shouldnt have a job in the first place"
12:34 "how hard is it to do a google search, to find this womans website, to find pictures of her. it took me only about 10 minutes to find all her social media accounts, and i'll be honest. i do this for a living. i know how to find alot more than just her social media accounts. i found out her families information... journalists should be able to dig thru information, determin relevent to the public and publish facts"
tim has 30k views on this video. do you think i'm the only person out of them that was able to find her cached instagram account or do you think the 30k are not interested in knowing it was her photo and would prefer to think mashable doctored and posted it.
i posted the links to the pages in the youtube comments yesterday, today they are deleted. a proper journalist would post a correction and thank sources.
(Old Spike)
Comments posted with links in them are automatically sent to the spam tab, and most creators with busy YouTube channels apply a blanket delete policy for anything marked as spam. I don't - I examine each one individually and make a decision, but larger channels don't have that luxury. I sent your links directly to Tim.
You left out the part where Tim ALSO shows that an Instagram aggregator returns the doctored photo, just not the post. Tim might have been too dense to realize the disparity in search results between Twitter user and Mashable reporter could be easily explained by how Google tailors search results. The Mashable reporter's search brings the modified version up first in his results because he had already been there to grab it. Google behaves similarly with me - things I've looked at most often come up first in the results when searching on images. Google always tries to tailor search results to whatever it knows about your past browing activity. Now it's possible the Twitter user was fudging his own search results to fuck with the Mashable reporter, but the more likely answer, and I would have liked a better analysis of this, is that it's just how the algorithm works.
You also keep missing Tim's focus on the profile photos - you even have it in your quote above and have still apparently missed it. The only thing Tim is actually trying to prove here with certainty is that the reporter had to dig to find that photo.
I think most of the 30K understand the point Tim was making, and my guess is some, like you, have found the actual Instagram post and have tried to notify Tim. Are you in agreement that this Mashable reporter deliberately used a modified photo of the YouTube shooter for his article? Yes or no? Do you understand why that is so verboten?
I've already agreed Tim should not have said "Now that's convenient". I also agree with you that he shouldn't have said "probably not" - also bad would have been "maybe it did" or "maybe it did, maybe it didn't" - this adds nothing to the point he's making. Dude - understand that I understand that he's not polished and can be a bit unimaginative (concrete) in his analysis sometimes. I like the fact that he makes striving for objectivity his primary professional goal. Some accuse him of having a left-wing bias, but I don't see that at all. He's more objective than some actor on TV reading a script. You prefer actors reading scripts over unpolished Tim?
(Short Spike)
(Old Spike)
Every tribe wants to make her a member of the tribe they perceive as the great enemy.
(Old Spike)
perzian tribe
(Old Spike)
arent arabs and all those stan people considered white?
(Old Spike)
It's a real shame she ended up with mental health issues because her body was bang'n
(Long Spike)
You can't have *both* a mentally healthy woman AND a bang'n bod. You have to choose.
(Old Spike)
Are you referring to the Hot Crazy Matrix?