WI: OJ Simpson Convicted of 1994 Murders

gaijin

Banned
Yeah, a fair amount of the time, but there are a lot of places on the internet like that. No reason to single out You Tube. And, they may make some good points. You can't just believe everything that the media tells you (which is what those YT commenters criticized other people for doing).

So, your point is that the Internet in general is a bad source of information.

Your next step is than to say that since they are all unreliable we might as well trust them because??? Reasons???

Thereby you completely ignore that there are levels of reliability on the net. Digital versions of printed publications generally follow the same standards of professionalism as the paper version. Hence, though certainly not without bias, they are certainly reliable to a certain extend.

Compare this to YouTube where anyone with a gmail account can post away.

The two are really really NOT comparable, and yet you chose to think that Yotubw comments "make some good points". I suspect that with good points you really mean "things I already agree with ad confirm my bias".
 
Yeah, a fair amount of the time, but there are a lot of places on the internet like that. No reason to single out You Tube. And, they may make some good points. You can't just believe everything that the media tells you (which is what those YT commenters criticized other people for doing).
there's an element of truth in that, but is there any particular reason to not believe what has been reported on the OJ case in the media? Is there any reason to doubt the reported evidence so far?
 
What would have happened if he was convicted. I don't know. The Dream Legal team did just enough race card/race baiting that there would have been some unrest. How much, I don't know. If they didn't do that at all and Johnny Cochran did not come up with the catchy little rhymes that stuck in everyone's head and it was all too obvious that he was guilty the unrest would have been minimal.

Johnny Cochran was absolutely disgusting they way he played those tricks. I think the glove incidient really was the defining moment, because it was one of the few pieces of evidence that was allowed to be shown. OJ had arthritis, causing his hands to swell, he took medicine for it, but he wasn't given it while in custody. The prosecuters must've known that, so why did they let the defense go ahead with it? That blows my mind.
 
So, your point is that the Internet in general is a bad source of information.

Your next step is than to say that since they are all unreliable we might as well trust them because??? Reasons???

Thereby you completely ignore that there are levels of reliability on the net. Digital versions of printed publications generally follow the same standards of professionalism as the paper version. Hence, though certainly not without bias, they are certainly reliable to a certain extend.

Compare this to YouTube where anyone with a gmail account can post away.

The two are really really NOT comparable, and yet you chose to think that Yotubw comments "make some good points". I suspect that with good points you really mean "things I already agree with ad confirm my bias".

No, I didn't say that it confirmed by bias. I really hadn't thought that much about the case until this show came on. And, while You Tubers can have poor credibility, to just trust the media blindly because it's supposed to be "professional" isn't the wisest thing. For example, do you trust Faux News just because they are supposed to be "professional"?
 
Top