Sometimes I want to ragequit the internets...

[Tamara]

...like when the thimble-headed gherkins of the Reynolds Wrap yarmulke brigade forward stuff like this (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/09/16/pakistani-national-tv-reveals-that-obamas-claim-to-have-killed-osama-bin-laden-is-an-american-hoax-paul-craig-roberts/) to my inbox.

[Chuck Haggard]

The tin-foil is strong with that one

[tremiles]

Crap like that gives conspiracy nutters a bad name.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

[BaiHu]

That's impressive, I wonder if a bald spot developed under his foil yarmulke while "thinking" that one through.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[BLR]

Eh.

I assume I'm lied to without exception.

[Clyde from Carolina]

So bad, so so bad.

[NEPAKevin]

The Truth is out there.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-zm6L3W64wRk/Uj2vYX-yQcI/AAAAAAAAAO4/zXckbdbcGk0/w836-h627-no/Trust+No+One_2.jpg

[Tamara]

Eh.

I assume I'm lied to without exception.

That's not how it works on the Internet.

Everyone is lying to you... Except this guy. He's bringing you The Troof. :rolleyes:

[Erik]

His problem is obviously the yarmulke. You need full coverage-protection. He's just getting the soft spot.

[John Ralston]

I always assume that whatever is written and distributed via the Internet is factual...he can't be lying.

[Chuck Haggard]

I only trust people who like big butts, because they can not lie.

[LittleLebowski]

I only trust people who like big butts, because they can not lie.

<high five>

[NickA]

I only trust people who like big butts, because they can not lie.

However, never trust a big butt and a smile, that's poison :p

[cclaxton]

Journalism in the United States is dead.

Yellow Journalism, sensationalism, outrageous accusations, and true-crime exploitation is the game.
Why?....You have to say something outrageous to get noticed with all the competition. Headlines get manipulated to sound onerous, only to find out it is not.
WHy?....You are trying to get donations or sell advertising....yes, it comes down to money.

What is truly sad about this is the people who believe the lies and the distortions, and the "journalists" who write these don't care....it comes down to making money.

What scares me is when someone says something so outrageous, which is a lie, that enough people get enraged that they become violent. Tim McVeigh was a good example. Radical rhetoric, of any form, can lead some who are mentally disabled or mentally challenged or just wanting to fit in to that group into radical behavior. And, that radical behavior can lead to innocent people dying. The guys who filled McVeigh's head with radical ideas didn't go to prison, but they are just as guilty in my view.

Just like the radical Imam's and radical Jews and radical Christians (think abortion clinic bombings), there were people who promoted these IDEAS and outrageous accusations, which convinces a few people they are true. And, then these individuals go off the deep end and take violent actions.

How do you teach common sense?

CC

[jetfire]

Journalism in the United States is dead.

No it's not. There are plenty of great reporters and journalists out there doing an excellent job of actually covering the news, but the problem is that no one reads or watches their stuff. If journalism is dead, it's not because journalists gave up, it's because consumers of mass media killed it.

[LittleLebowski]

Journalism in the United States is dead.


Nope (http://reason.com).

[ToddG]

Journalism in the United States is dead.

Yellow Journalism, sensationalism, outrageous accusations, and true-crime exploitation is the game.


Second sentence applies to first sentence, methinks. ;)

[Mr_White]

however, never trust a big butt and a smile, that's poison :p

Dammit you beat me to it!

[jlw]

Regarding journalism:

I have seen Fox News Channel doing stories on that "stars" dancing show on ABC, and I have seen ABC news doing stories on Fox's singing show. In other words, competing networks doing stories about their competition's product.

That's not journalism. It's infotainment.

However, there are plenty of journalist out there still. You just have to seek them out.

[TGS]

Journalism in the United States is dead.


Absolutely not.

Journalism may not be mainstream, but it's certainly not kaput. It's aggravating to find the good stuff out there, however.


it comes down to making money.

Well, like anything in life, wages and products have to come from somewhere. Unlike what most of society thinks today, you can't just go "poof!" and magically have products and wages.

I have to explain this to my people on a weekly basis as well. It's not that our administrators are greedy, it's that we were operating $4m in the red last year, are still $1.5m in the red this year, and that we really can't stand up that extra rig to help share the workload and provide better coverage to our patients. The money has to come from somewhere to put up that extra crew, truck, fuel, maintenance, equipment, ect....23 minute response times be damned.

[cclaxton]

Nope (http://reason.com).

One of their headlines reads:
"Free Speech Is So Annoying to Elected Officials"

Same sensationalist drivel.

This IS a great website, and better than the average bear.

I stick by my position.
CC

[cclaxton]

Second sentence applies to first sentence, methinks. ;)

Maybe you are agreeing, but I don't call anything in the second sentence "journalism." True journalism requires telling unbiased facts not affected by advertisers, target audience, money, sensationalism, political influence, copy editors, and bias.

CC

[cclaxton]

Perhaps I should have written a caveat: Any journalism related to news or opinion that can take on a political or ideological slant.

Here is an example of some great American Journalism (Not saying they are perfect, either, but they don't have any agenda other than our health) : http://www.health.harvard.edu/

CC

[cclaxton]

Second sentence applies to first sentence, methinks. ;)

I JUST got that!!!! ROFL!!!

You are right!....See what media has taught me!!

CC

[LittleLebowski]

One of their headlines reads:
"Free Speech Is So Annoying to Elected Officials"

Same sensationalist drivel.

This IS a great website, and better than the average bear.

I stick by my position.
CC

Snap, uninformed judgement and categorically wrong but I don't care enough to argue with you over what I read daily.

[BLR]

Perhaps I should have written a caveat: Any journalism related to news or opinion that can take on a political or ideological slant.

Here is an example of some great American Journalism (Not saying they are perfect, either, but they don't have any agenda other than our health) : http://www.health.harvard.edu/

CC

You don't think HMS has a political or ideological slant?

I honestly can't think of an institution that doesn't.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

[Mr_White]

Perhaps I should have written a caveat: Any journalism related to news or opinion that can take on a political or ideological slant.

Here is an example of some great American Journalism (Not saying they are perfect, either, but they don't have any agenda other than our health) : http://www.health.harvard.edu/

CC


You don't think HMS has a political or ideological slant?

I honestly can't think of an institution that doesn't.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

Tell those authoritarians to get their jackbooted blood pressure cuff offa my freedom and cholesterol-loving arm!

[jetfire]

Maybe you are agreeing, but I don't call anything in the second sentence "journalism." True journalism requires telling unbiased facts not affected by advertisers, target audience, money, sensationalism, political influence, copy editors, and bias.

CC

Y helo thar, No True Scotsman.

Journalism has always been affected by bias, political influence, money, sensationalism, target audience, and advertisers. In fact, a lot of those things are redundant, if you want to simplify the list you could just write "bias and money." Just because an article is written by a journalist with a bias, then edited by someone with a bias, and printed in a magazine with advertisers doesn't mean it's not good journalism or even journalism at all. Yes, mass market infotainment news sucks a lot, but if you toss out every bit of reporting in any industry that could be affected by your criteria, the Daily News would read "today the sun rose and later in the day it set."

[Mr_White]

the Daily News would read "today the sun rose and later in the day it set."

I don't think everyone would agree on that even. For example, I would probably disagree just to be a contrarian.

[ToddG]

For example, I would probably disagree just to be a contrarian.

No you wouldn't.

[cclaxton]

You don't think HMS has a political or ideological slant?

I honestly can't think of an institution that doesn't.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

Does the institution have a political and ideological slant?...Sure.
Does their Health Newsletter?...No. Can they be wrong?...sure...everyone can make a mistake.
But these are doctors and pharmacists who truly want to help people improve their health. To inject bias would be to potentially harm our health or waste precious health care dollars.

Society can learn from the health care community in terms of how to put facts and people and unbiased communication first.

CC

[TGS]

But these are doctors and pharmacists who truly want to help people improve their health. To inject bias would be to potentially harm our health or waste precious health care dollars.

Society can learn from the health care community in terms of how to put facts and people and unbiased communication first.

CC

ummmmmm.....

I'm going to wholeheartedly disagree with you on that, on the grounds of gross naivety. There's more business-minded decisions and political games in healthcare that are made to promote a revenue program than you think.

[BLR]

Does the institution have a political and ideological slant?...Sure.
Does their Health Newsletter?...No. Can they be wrong?...sure...everyone can make a mistake.
But these are doctors and pharmacists who truly want to help people improve their health. To inject bias would be to potentially harm our health or waste precious health care dollars.

Society can learn from the health care community in terms of how to put facts and people and unbiased communication first.

CC

What makes you believe the newsletter does not?



Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 4

[Chuck Haggard]

No you wouldn't.

But he could if he wanted to because he has RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mr_White]

No you wouldn't.


But he could if he wanted to because he is a dick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is more like it.

[Tamara]

But these are doctors and pharmacists who truly want to help people improve their health. To inject bias would be to potentially harm our health or waste precious health care dollars.

That is the funniest thing I have read on the internet all day.

[Noleshooter]

No you wouldn't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

[TCinVA]

Journalism in the United States is dead.

You mean as opposed to yesteryear when LBJ was using his senate power to impact regulatory decisions at the FCC and other state, local, and federal agencies to push newspapers and radio stations to give him favorable coverage, force corporations to buy add time on the radio stations he owned (for ridiculously high prices...a bribe), and bury any news about his graft and corruption? The graft and corruption that was in the process leading to impeachment before a bullet made him President?

The idea that journalism as an institution has some nobility is demonstrable nonsense. Always has been. It's propaganda, more blatantly obvious in today's market due to the sheer number of media options available. When Time runs different covers in different areas notably not mentioning the epic mess our Nobel Prize winning president made of the Syria thing it's harder to keep under wraps in the age of the internet.

Oh, and as for the money angle...it's not always about money. Lots of people in journalism are perfectly happy to shape policy. Wielding power is as much of a turn on as big stacks of cash.

[Chuck Haggard]

This is more like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tdGCvGRtEo

[jetfire]

Wielding power is as much of a turn on as big stacks of cash.

Even a small bit of power can be quite intoxicating for people.

[Kyle Reese]

Even a small bit of power can be quite intoxicating for people.

Angry DMV clerks come to mind....

[Palmguy]

But these are doctors and pharmacists who truly want to help people improve their health. To inject bias would be to potentially harm our health or waste precious health care dollars.

Society can learn from the health care community in terms of how to put facts and people and unbiased communication first.

CC

Holy kitten.

[Palmguy]

What scares me is when someone says something so outrageous, which is a lie, that enough people get enraged that they become violent. Tim McVeigh was a good example. Radical rhetoric, of any form, can lead some who are mentally disabled or mentally challenged or just wanting to fit in to that group into radical behavior. And, that radical behavior can lead to innocent people dying. The guys who filled McVeigh's head with radical ideas didn't go to prison, but they are just as guilty in my view.

Are you talking about anyone in particular?

[LittleLebowski]

No you wouldn't.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y