Here are my responses to the debate as you've framed it. Regarding your first paragraph: Conservatives do the same. Regarding your second paragraph: False assumption regarding shutting them down. I disagree about MSNBC and CNN being mostly opinion pieces. Now what?
Funny is an opinion. No source needed as I'm not alleging that you'll find it funny. It goes to my state of mind. No one can prove to another their state of mind over the internet. My stating that I hadn't seen it before is first hand witness testimony. Witnesses testify as to what they saw/heard/etc. Proof doesn't necessarily factor in. What matters is credibility and plausibility. The testimony can be supported by other citable facts, additional witness testimony, etc. ...this ^ is off the top of my head. Again, I'm not offering those particular statements as assertions that I want others to believe. Finally, these are well-known and understood intuitive concepts; again, your comparison fails miserably.
That is a great illustration of the issue with liberals in general. Liberals don't seem capable of discerning what are facts and what are opinions. You are listening and reading opinions, however, you are assuming that they are news and/or facts. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/05/is-msnbc-the-place-for-opinion/ In the Pew Research sample, two of the three major cable news channels had a fairly even distribution of airtime devoted to opinion and to newsgathering. CNN was the only one to feature more reporting (54%) than opinion (46%) overall. At the Fox News Channel, the split leaned toward moderately more opinion (55%) than reporting (45%). On MSNBC, however, the mix of news and commentary skewed heavily in one direction. Fully 85% of the channel’s airtime in the period studied was devoted to opinion. Only 15% of its programming was filled with reporting.
Your data is almost a decade old. Had you included this cite in the first place, my response would have been: Dude, your data is nine years old! I barely watch MSNBC now, and even less so in 2012, so I could offer no opinion in the matter, and probably wouldn't have remember it had I watched it back then. My opinion was about what I believe today. You initial assertion did not restrict the time frame to 2012. But we did learn something: You learned the benefit of citing sources. And we learned that Fox was also mostly opinion nine years ago. We also learned that CNN was more news, and less opinion back then when compared to the other two. Here's the real takeaway. Cons only had Fox then, Libs etc. had options. Libs were more likely to receive real news than Cons. Some things probably haven't changed. I could probably learn more if I read the whole article.
The point is both parties want to silence or attack any speech they don't agree with. Claiming it is just one party shows bias and having a closed mind. The GOP wants to cancel as many people that they dont agree with as the left does so wake up.
Righties are a little more comfortable using the government to do so. Lefties are just using capitalism/boycotts.
Laughing my ass off. Just wait until we ourselves get cancelled if we refer to our own names with the proper gender pronoun.