Man Made Global Warming

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by swiss

One of the basic rights of stockholders at the ASM is...?

And the only way to become a stockholder is....?

True, doesn't matter which party you vote for, the result is always the same.

Pretty much because german voters hardly leave them a choice. Too much common ground.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by kendo65

Are you saying that the Swiss mainstream media have a socialist bias?

The BBC has been getting attacked for some time now from the Conservative right for supposed bias. Interestingly Labour have also had a bash at them at times. My opinion - if you're annoying both sides you're probably doing ok.

As I argued above - once you get past the verifiable factual stuff (earthquakes in japan, numbers dead in a car crash) and move into the Class 2 stuff it's arguable that there are only opinions anyway. In this territory even if you try hard to be impartial it is likely that someone will be annoyed.

It's also likely that the further out you are from the centre on either left or right, the more you are likely to perceive the attempt at balanced, centre-line coverage to be biased.

Which explains why those with more hard-line positions are the ones getting most annoyed...

+1

The problem with most radicals is that they do not recognize themselves as radicals.

[jimson8]

Originally Posted by kendo65

And here is the problem. The Reagan administration in 1987 effectively abolished the requirement for television news to attempt to provide balanced and fair coverage (I believe the argument was that it infringes freedom of speech and property rights - i.e. wealthy media owners should be able to have their organizations say what they damn well want).

The above statement is biased as it ascribes motives based on opinion, but the press as advocate began a long time prior to 1987.

It wasn't Walter Cronkite's place to declare the Vietnam war unwinnable in 1968.

History now tells us that the Tet offensive was a rather large military defeat, rendering the Viet Cong southern insurgency, combat ineffective. What militarily could have been a turning point for victory became politically, a turning point for failure.

Few would now disagree that the venture was a huge mistake from the beginning, but Cronkite had a huge amount of influence on the public and wasn't really qualified to make such a statement.

The press can and does agree on tables that have 4 legs, but the majority of "news" is more subjective.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by jimson8

The above statement is biased as it ascribes motives based on opinion, but the press as advocate began a long time prior to 1987..

The Reagan administration ending the requirement for balanced coverage is verifiable fact. The argument quoted is the reason given for implementing the change. "wealthy media owners should be able to have their organizations say what they damn well want" is my opinion of what it in effect meant.

Press advocacy did begin long ago. The question is whether it is necessarily a good thing and whether removing an obligation for balance is going to make the situation better or worse.

Originally Posted by jimson8

It wasn't Walter Cronkite's place to declare the Vietnam war unwinnable in 1968.

History now tells us that the Tet offensive was a rather large military defeat, rendering the Viet Cong southern insurgency, combat ineffective. What militarily could have been a turning point for victory became politically, a turning point for failure.

Few would now disagree that the venture was a huge mistake from the beginning, but Cronkite had a huge amount of influence on the public and wasn't really qualified to make such a statement.

On Cronkite - true, in that by my argument he was crossing the boundary. I would say that in his particular case it was very much presented as a 'comment' piece. Such was his authority that it carried a lot of influence (too much). I would say that the direction of travel in the intervening years has been such that the situation has got much worse now though.

Also, does 'history show' what you say it shows? Note that the question about that moment in the Vietnam war is definitely a Class 2 one - it's not absolute indisputable fact in the same (simple) way that number of legs on a chair is - i.e. people could disagree with your interpretation.

Originally Posted by jimson8

The press can and does agree on tables that have 4 legs, but the majority of "news" is more subjective.

Most of the 'interesting' stuff is anyway

The tables thing was just an easy example - main point was a lot of stuff is not just down to one's personal opinion which was where you seemed to be in your post.

Also, it can be difficult to know where exactly fact ends and opinion begins - and if your news media is distorting the situation from the very beginning it can be impossible.

----edit: rewritten for clarity and to expand some points

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by kendo65

m the very beginning it can be impossible.

The very beginning would be the indoctrination that begins when one attends public school in USA. The teachers are all unionized. In other words, most hold liberal point of view. Only way to escape is to seek alternative view points. Fox News is one alternative. Private/Home schooling, another. For teachers unions, it is all about getting as much money as possible out of the taxpayer. Much of this money is re-allocated to administrators instead of teachers. Most people can discern who, what, where, when and why. They can still be scammed, but over time some get it figured out and some don't. If you come out of public school system and never look at opposing view, you will be exploited. Exhibit A, "rock the vote", "hope and change". All those youths jumping on the Obummer bandwagon now very sad and unemployed. Similar situation happened with Carter then swing to Reagan. Probably will happen again.

@ beowolf
if right/left are 50/50, that is not a nation in stagnation. that is a "moderate" view of utopia! Or call it a political equilibrium. But it is rare to have it last very long. There are always forces in play.

[jimson8]

Originally Posted by kendo65

True, in that by my argument he was crossing the boundary. I would say though that in his particular case it was very much presented as a 'comment' piece unlike a lot of things today. Such was his authority that it carried a lot of (too much) influence. I would say that the direction of travel in the intervening years has been such that the situation has got much worse now though.

Also, does 'history show' what you say it shows? Note that the question about that moment in the Vietnam war is definitely a Class 2 one - it's not absolute indisputable fact in the same (simple) way that number of legs on a chair is - i.e. people could disagree with your interpretation.
I would say it is a subjective view, yes.



The tables thing was just an easy example - main point was a lot of stuff is not just down to one's personal opinion which was where you seemed to be in your post.

I was using the same metaphor. I still believe most things that are as B&W are reported as such.

Also, it can be difficult to know where exactly fact ends and opinion begins - and if your news media is distorting the situation from the very beginning it can be impossible.

Indeed.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

The very beginning would be the indoctrination that begins when one attends public school in USA. The teachers are all unionized. In other words, most hold liberal point of view. Only way to escape is to seek alternative view points. Fox News is one alternative. Private/Home schooling, another. For teachers unions, it is all about getting as much money as possible out of the taxpayer. Much of this money is re-allocated to administrators instead of teachers. Most people can discern who, what, where, when and why. They can still be scammed, but over time some get it figured out and some don't. If you come out of public school system and never look at opposing view, you will be exploited. Exhibit A, "rock the vote", "hope and change". All those youths jumping on the Obummer bandwagon now very sad and unemployed. Similar situation happened with Carter then swing to Reagan. Probably will happen again.

@ beowolf
if right/left are 50/50, that is not a nation in stagnation. that is a "moderate" view of utopia! Or call it a political equilibrium. But it is rare to have it last very long. There are always forces in play.

Frankly, I'm embarassed as an American to have someone who thinks like this representing our country. Not all Americans are this ignorant or racist.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

The very beginning would be the indoctrination that begins when one attends public school in USA. The teachers are all unionized. In other words, most hold liberal point of view. Only way to escape is to seek alternative view points. Fox News is one alternative. Private/Home schooling, another. For teachers unions, it is all about getting as much money as possible out of the taxpayer. Much of this money is re-allocated to administrators instead of teachers. Most people can discern who, what, where, when and why. They can still be scammed, but over time some get it figured out and some don't. If you come out of public school system and never look at opposing view, you will be exploited. Exhibit A, "rock the vote", "hope and change". All those youths jumping on the Obummer bandwagon now very sad and unemployed. Similar situation happened with Carter then swing to Reagan. Probably will happen again.

You either get good teachers, those are well paid. Or you get bad teachers, which are badly paid. AFAIK, teachers in the US public schools are rather badly paid. [/QUOTE]

@ beowolf
if right/left are 50/50, that is not a nation in stagnation. that is a "moderate" view of utopia! Or call it a political equilibrium. But it is rare to have it last very long. There are always forces in play.

Not if they block each other in government to a degree that nothing can be done anymore. Democracy and a working society is all about compromise and the willingness to take a step back from your own convictions.

[jimson8]

Originally Posted by Oldschool61

Frankly, I'm embarassed as an American to have someone who thinks like this representing our country. Not all Americans are this ignorant or racist.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed to see a fellow American somehow find racism in that post.

Ridiculous.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by jimson8

Frankly, I'm embarrassed to see a fellow American somehow find racism in that post.

Ridiculous.

Open your eyes!