Moderator: Tony Crocker
Admin wrote:Both papers, and in particular the New York Times have a recent history of ignoring stories that run counter to their editorial agenda and, when other media have addressed them to death, the paper finally relents but buries it somewhere in the classifieds section or other. Witness many recent versions of Czar-gate. It's not surprising that the paper is hemorrhaging both subscribers and revenue.
Czar-gate, really? The only people freaking out over the appointment of "Czars" are the Glen Beck types, aka the same kinds of people that are seriously concerned that Obama wasn't born in the US.Admin wrote:Both papers, and in particular the New York Times have a recent history of ignoring stories that run counter to their editorial agenda and, when other media have addressed them to death, the paper finally relents but buries it somewhere in the classifieds section or other. Witness many recent versions of Czar-gate.
It's not surprising that the paper is hemorrhaging both subscribers and revenue.
Tony Crocker wrote:Climategate? Corruption and vigorous attempt at cover-up.
Patrick wrote:Stuff taken out of context probably.
Admin wrote:Patrick wrote:Stuff taken out of context probably.
Isn't that the standard-issue response for when you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar?
Patrick wrote:Admin wrote:Patrick wrote:Stuff taken out of context probably.
Isn't that the standard-issue response for when you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar?
I bet someone could find a good quote from Tony right here.![]()
You're listening to Fox News too much admin, not good for the brain cells.![]()
Admin wrote:Patrick wrote:You're listening to Fox News too much admin, not good for the brain cells.![]()
Neither is the Kool-Aid that's affecting your objectivity. Just keep on drinkin', my friend.
What is the percentage of researcher involved?
Too lazy to see the clip pointing out to Fox's good math logic?
Tony Crocker wrote:Have lots of![]()
![]()
ready if Admin and Patrick are going to
politics.
But the criticism of Fox News is more than just the usual media hype and pundit idiocy that makes up the bread and butter of Daily Show fodder. He rails on everyone for the general circus-act nature of cable news, but Fox seems to have a special talent for graphics "mistakes" and other inaccuracies that suggests an agenda. Patrick pointed out the most recent one, but within the last month or so they have twice showed canned crowd footage from large events/rallies when the event they were commenting on had a small fraction of that turnout. Then there were the numerous times they mislabeled republican lawmakers as democrats while reporting on the individual's sex scandals (yes that same "mistake" has happened more than once).Tony Crocker wrote:I saw that on Daily Show last night. Jon Stewart is not likely to run out of material anytime soon with the amount of idiocy being spewed from all directions these days.
rfarren wrote:Fox news aside. There are many smart people, scientists as well as professionals, who have a healthy amount of skepticism in regards to the IPCC report. If we just look at the data and forget the politics and the media, the connection between man and global warming becomes somewhat less stated.
That being said, I dry-heaved today when listening to NPR talk about global warming, and man's connection to it,... and their wholesale buying into it.
Not that any of this is relevant to a discussion on climate change however. I think "climate change in the popular media" is about as useful as "healthcare in the popular media" which is to say, almost completely unproductive and misguided.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests