 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 107 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614093 Today 6 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it pisses me off so much when i hear people talking about 'what they read in the newspaper' and repeating the bias as if it were created from their own brain. more often than not i swear they don't even question what they read (i'm largely thinking of my unfortunate sister here). and also. who are they going to listen to. me? or the seemingly superior organisation which towers above anything i can say. irresponsible bastards. audience discretion advised!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It is their point. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i have a newspaper i really share opinions with in like 70 or 80% of the articles or opinions its "die Zeit" (german "times") i also get greenpeace magazine anything i tell about people i name the source. i happen to believe most of the numbers and figures in it, whithout questioning them too much, knowing that often they cannot be exact but somewhat close, the closest to be known probably i also happen to believe that many stupid people read stupid newspapers, but if we would go to burn all the stupid media wouldnt that be faschism? sad but true... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
People tend to believe things in papers that reinforce their own views, political standpoints, arguments, etc. They're a lot more critical of their opposition's press. For example: A lot of stuff in The Guardian is incredibly blinkered in its outlook, ao much so that it often comes across like it's written by a load of reactionary students. The articles have so many typos they make the average zilty post appear intelligible. Most stuff in The Times is worth discussing, well argued and seemingly without bias. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Oh and The Sun is good for giggles. It's like a male equivalent of a slagazine. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah for real dude fuck some newspapers GET A TV RIGHT |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Unfortunately, most views that differ in regards to "the news" are often cited as skeptical and cynical. Both are associated negatively. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hate it when people flag you up when you mention a paper you read, like if you say 'I read in The Telegraph ....' they'll make a snorty noise with the implication ";OMG y dont u read da gaurdain lol!", I mean fuck off... its the news either way and if you can't understand that its going to be a bit skewed one way or the other then you cant really be trusted with a newspaper also cause i study biology people ask me about some unbelievable crap that theyve read and then get defensive when I tell them its highly unlikely that its accurate |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
A very valid point. I must say though, I do like winding up Daily Mail readers, but that's the exception: "Who is out to kill us today?" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't think the problem is the people as much as it is the newspapers. Has anyone noticed that journalists actually really really suck at writing? Whenever I read something in a regular newspaper, I just end up flipping the page and going "hey wait! did the article end there?" The articles aren't even close to actually covering more than the basics of any (I say any because all stories are subject to this, but by and large, it's the political stories covering some sort of political "happening" (can be anything from a war to some firms wanting the same assets)) story. However, whenever some researcher in the field decides it's a good idea to write an article or the newspaper decides it's a good idea to have some researcher write an article, I finally feel I get a better grip on what the case actually is. Now, of course, I haven't studied politics, and I bet if I had I could've figured out stuff from the minimal information in the article (knowing theories and special resources for information), but alas I am, like most of norway, not a student of politics, and I bet there are people who read the newspapers and even though they have gained as little real information from it as I have, they don't go "oh, the article ended? how strange," but rather they just skip on over to the next page to read about some sports or something thinking they learned something from the article. What the papers should do, is they should try to educate a bit. In-depth information. This also goes for news in other media. The occasional tv-documentary won't be enough to educate people (how many people do you think bother with watching a documentary on what goes on in some country they can't even pronounce the name of after a whole day at work?); the news need to start digging deeper, and start using more people who actually know what they're on about. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh, and debate shows debate shows need to stop being.. so god damned annoying! Maybe we'd actually get to hear what someone wants to say every once in a while if they made the shows longer and actually let people finish their sentences before moving on to another subject while sms' directly addressing the politicians wishing them a happy christmas roll by on the bottom of the screen. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It could be worse... FOX5 news at 11 spends more time plugging "24" and "American Idol" than reporting actual news stories. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
one word about fox / cnn / abc news etc... plastic. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Moaning about "The News" is like saying cancer is bad. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and they're doing lots of research on how to cure cancer |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
'if its in the news, its got to be true' |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This is where the internet made a big difference for me, because you can read something you dont quite follow from a few sources and check the background of the situation in less time than you would spend reading a newspaper article |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
cancer is bad? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the internet is good |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah, it has helped a bit, but some things are so hard to actually define in a phrase that you can search for with some level of efficiency on any search engine that I still can't find everything I want. There's also the part about people actually thinking they know all there is to know about it after having read the article in the newspaper; they won't actively search for more information on-line. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
*raises hand* i'm afraid i'm guilty of that little crime 'hey guys, listen to what i know about the world' |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
heh, oddly enough they just did a small segment on cancer on the news... Highest recovery rates and lowest new case reports since it's been treated. ...but they're back to "American Idol" news again. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I loathe The Sun with my entire being. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's bad enough when you read it knowing it's a joke, but thinking that this is the main source of information on world events for a fairly large number of people is shocking. DM: Your point about them not being able to write is valid. They so often get it wrong. My pet hate is when they labour over one point, repeating themselves and rephrasing the same thing over and over. Giving completely unnecessary details, just to pad it out, like a first year student struggling to meet a minimum word count. They then run out of time to talk about something else (that is more important) and skip over the details of that. Even The Times (which regardless of whether or not you agree with their political stance, is undeniably one of the best written/edited) regularly makes this mistake. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
