News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[mikejs78]

that the governor's office will work to ensure that county taxpayers aren't hit with Disney's obligations

This statement shows bias as well. There is nothing to say that the governor's office will actually do this (considering that there are a lot of limitations on what they can do). At most,.it can be said that the governor's office claims they will work to ensure that county taxpayers aren't hit with Disney's obligations, but have not offered any specifics on how this could be accomplished.

Presenting it as fact that the governor's office will do this would not be responsible journalism either.

 

[MandaM]

Respectfully, I'll agree to disagree.

Journalists aren’t transcriptionists. Their job isn’t just to write down what was said - it’s to get to the facts of the matter. The fact is, DeSantis claims he has a plan but hasn’t provided any evidence at all that he actually does. Not a single shred. The fact is, too, that DeSantis has repeatedly lied about this situation. His claims can’t just be repeated as fact.

 

[mikejs78]

This thread is one massive echo chamber lol. Anyways, not worth responding to each one of you but I will continue to support DeSantis. He’s doing the right thing.

If you consider stifling free speech and doing something that will hurt the state so you can advance your national political ambitions the right thing,

 

[Brian]

Give us one good reason for this plan to remain secret.

If you read the last few pages, you will see that I have repeatedly criticized the governor and his team for keeping the plan secret. I have also repeatedly stated that it should have never happened like this. That doesn't excuse the media from it's usual routine of carrying water for it's favored political party.

This statement shows bias as well. There is nothing to say that the governor's office will actually do this (considering that there are a lot of limitations on what they can do). At most,.it can be said that the governor's office claims they will work to ensure that county taxpayers aren't hit with Disney's obligations, but have not offered any specifics on how this could be accomplished.

Presenting it as fact that the governor's office will do this would not be responsible journalism either.

Agreed. The bolded part is a fair statement, and I like it better than the original that @lazyboy97o and I had agreed on a page or two back. It reads to me like actual journalism.

Journalists aren’t transcriptionists. Their job isn’t just to write down what was said - it’s to get to the facts of the matter. The fact is, DeSantis claims he has a plan but hasn’t provided any evidence at all that he actually does. Not a single shred. The fact is, too, that DeSantis has repeatedly lied about this situation. His claims can’t just be repeated as fact.

So we should just repeat the claims of partisan figures like Scott Randolph without any chance to respond? If so, I wish you the best in finding a replacement for CNN+.

 

[mikejs78]

So we should just repeat the claims of partisan figures like Scott Randolph without any chance to respond? If so, I wish you the best in finding a replacement for CNN+.

Of course there should be a chance to respond, but it should be with specifics. Randolph presented specifics. Either refute those specifics with facts or offer some specifics of your own.

 

[peter11435]

This thread is one massive echo chamber lol. Anyways, not worth responding to each one of you but I will continue to support DeSantis. He’s doing the right thing.

What exactly is he doing that is the right thing here. Violating the first amendment? Harming the citizens of Florida? Attacking one of the states economic engines and one of their largest employers? Marginalizing entire groups of people?

 

[lazyboy97o]

So we should just repeat the claims of partisan figures like Scott Randolph without any chance to respond? If so, I wish you the best in finding a replacement for CNN+.

His affiliation does not matter. What has he said that is untrue or even suspect? Are his statements part of a pattern of false statements regarding this issue?

 

[peter11435]

I consider defending 5 year olds from being groomed at school the right thing.

Ok then support a bill that actually deals with that “problem”

 

[lazyboy97o]

This thread is one massive echo chamber lol. Anyways, not worth responding to each one of you but I will continue to support DeSantis. He’s doing the right thing.

Respond? You haven’t even bothered to make a single specific or factual statement.

 

[MandaM]

If you read the last few pages, you will see that I have repeatedly criticized the governor and his team for keeping the plan secret. I have also repeatedly stated that it should have never happened like this. That doesn't excuse the media from it's usual routine of carrying water for it's favored political party.


Agreed. The bolded part is a fair statement, and I like it better than the original that @lazyboy97o and I had agreed on a page or two back. It reads to me like actual journalism.


So we should just repeat the claims of partisan figures like Scott Randolph without any chance to respond? If so, I wish you the best in finding a replacement for CNN+.

When did I say there was no right to respond? Of course there is. But so far, nobody has actually debunked his claims and statistics. The other side has certainly been given ample opportunity to do so. But, all they’ve given us so far is vague assurances that it’ll all work out somehow by a person who has repeatedly lied to advance his position. The statements can’t be treated equally becsuse the substance isn’t equal.

 

[Brian]

Of course there should be a chance to respond, but it should be with specifics. Randolph presented specifics. Either refute those specifics with facts or offer some specifics of your own.

I agree that the governor's office can do themselves a favor for their own credibility and offer up some specifics, but as far as the issue of reporting goes, I'll take it a step further and say that in the absence of specifics, they should still mention, as you suggested earlier, that "the governor's office claims they will work to ensure that county taxpayers aren't hit with Disney's obligations, but have not offered any specifics on how this could be accomplished."

This at least gives the reader the whole story, where, if interested, they could keep an eye on it for future developments.

His affiliation does not matter. What has he said that is untrue or even suspect? Are his statements part of a pattern of false statements regarding this issue?

His affiliation very much matters as this is an overtly partisan issue, and he represents a specific party. When presenting one side of the political argument, it has been tradition and best practice to present the "other side." That's why Fox News has liberal commentators on staff to serve on panel discussions, and the same can be said about CNN vice versa.

To be clear, I am not making any claim at this time that Randolph has said something untrue or misleading, however, to pretend that he is incapable of doing so for political gain for himself or his party is simply naive.

 

[mikejs78]

I found DeSantis' plan for RCID dissolution!

 

[peter11435]

To be clear, I am not making any claim at this time that Randolph has said something untrue or misleading, however, to pretend that he is incapable of doing so for political gain for himself or his party is simply naive.

Nobody is claiming that he is incapable of stating untrue or misleading information. But unless you can dispute his statements then his affiliation is irrelevant.

You’re basically saying “everything he said was factual and supported with evidence but I don’t believe it because he’s a democrat”

 

[MandaM]

This thread is one massive echo chamber lol. Anyways, not worth responding to each one of you but I will continue to support DeSantis. He’s doing the right thing.

Wow, it’s crazy to see the right suddenly supporting socialism - cheering on the government taking away control from a company and giving it to the state. Not to mention that it’s all done in punishment for the great crime of saying something the governor didn’t like. Normally, you have to go somewhere like China or Russia to get that kind of fascism. Never thought I’d see “patriots” supporting it.

 

[MandaM]

Here’s the main problem…
The far left-wing agenda teachers are gonna’ teach/tell your little children whatever they want, whenever they want, inappropriate to you or not. Their are no cameras, and while your off at your jobs earning a living, they have them captive. No legislation is gonna’ stop that. And, that’s the REALLY scary part.

Take off the tinfoil hat.

 

[peter11435]

Here’s the main problem…
The far left-wing agenda teachers are gonna’ teach/tell your little children whatever they want, whenever they want, inappropriate to you or not. Their are no cameras, and while your off at your jobs earning a living, they have them captive. No legislation is gonna’ stop that. And, that’s the REALLY scary part.

Now do the other side

 

[Brian]

When did I say there was no right to respond? Of course there is. But so far, nobody has actually debunked his claims and statistics. The other side has certainly been given ample opportunity to do so. But, all they’ve given us so far is vague assurances that it’ll all work out somehow by a person who has repeatedly lied to advance his position. The statements can’t be treated equally becsuse the substance isn’t equal.

My point is that it is for the consumer to decide that the statements aren't equal, not the reporters.

Nobody is claiming that he is incapable of stating untrue or misleading information. But unless you can dispute his statements then his affiliation is irrelevant.

You’re basically saying “everything he said was factual and supported with evidence but I don’t believe it because he’s a democrat”

His affiliation is relevant in the sense that, when it comes to journalism, it is tradition to allow the "other side" the chance to respond, and give voice to their response. Again, that's why Fox News has liberals like Juan Williams and Jessica Tarlov on staff; they are routinely on panel discussions during "straight news" and even opinion shows to ensure that the "other side" can still have their say. The same is true, I'm told, of CNN.

If you're quoting a partisan tax collector, I would say that there is an obligation to ensure that somewhere in your article, a statement from the other side of the argument is quoted, or at least that a good faith attempt was made to secure one. If Randolph were both non-partisan and had no history of serving in or running for the legislature as a partisan, I would argue that this obligation is not as pressing.

Obviously Democrats can say true things and Republicans can say false things. The same applies in reverse. It's important, however, when presenting one of them that you at least allow the other side the chance to respond. Then the consumer can make their own informed decision as to how to view the matter.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Here’s the main problem…
The far left-wing agenda teachers are gonna’ teach/tell your little children whatever they want, whenever they want, inappropriate to you or not. Their are no cameras, and while your off at your jobs earning a living, they have them captive. No legislation is gonna’ stop that. And, that’s the REALLY scary part.

Oh boy.

 

[Figment1984]

Here’s the main problem…
The far left-wing agenda teachers are gonna’ teach/tell your little children whatever they want, whenever they want, inappropriate to you or not. Their are no cameras, and while your off at your jobs earning a living, they have them captive. No legislation is gonna’ stop that. And, that’s the REALLY scary part.

If you’re that paranoid, homeschool is an option. Might as well go one step further and lock them in a tower like Rapunzel until they turn 18 years old since any adult (and other children) are capable of expressing ideas you may disagree with. All the best with that.

 

[peter11435]

My point is that it is for the consumer to decide that the statements aren't equal, not the reporters.


His affiliation is relevant in the sense that, when it comes to journalism, it is tradition to allow the "other side" the chance to respond, and give voice to their response. Again, that's why Fox News has liberals like Juan Williams and Jessica Tarlov on staff; they are routinely on panel discussions during "straight news" and even opinion shows to ensure that the "other side" can still have their say. The same is true, I'm told, of CNN.

If you're quoting a partisan tax collector, I would say that there is an obligation to ensure that somewhere in your article, a statement from the other side of the argument is quoted, or at least that a good faith attempt was made to secure one. If Randolph were both non-partisan and had no history of serving in or running for the legislature as a partisan, I would argue that this obligation is not as pressing.

Obviously Democrats can say true things and Republicans can say false things. The same applies in reverse. It's important, however, when presenting one of them that you at least allow the other side the chance to respond. Then the consumer can make their own informed decision as to how to view the matter.

People have asked for DeSantis to respond. People want to hear the plan. Saying you have a plan is neither a plan nor a response.

Especially when he doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally enact a plan and the legislature doesn’t meet again for nearly a year. And even when they do they are bound by the state constitution and the willingness of effected parties to participate. The problem the governor and legislature has created here is harder to fix than they are leading you to believe.