-
-
If it wasn't him it would have been some other journalist, none of them would have sat on the story for the public good.Originally posted by Cyberman View PostAbout time too !!
It's somewhat redolent of an emporer fiddling while the city is in flames... -
From the story to which you link:Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
Also appearing are the Financial Times editor Lionel Barber, the Guardian columnist Sir Simon Jenkins and the Mail financial editor, Alex Brummer.
So it seems that it's more the role of the media that is being examined, rather than one of your personal bugbears being brought before The Inquisition.
When will people like you ever grasp that the way the news is constructed and presented to you is deliberately engineered so as to provoke a Pavlovian response from you for the purpose of furthering the agenda of those who exploit your credulity to their own ends?
Seriously, if you learned this stuff, you'd be much less prone to making a fool of yourself by getting all excited over nothing.
EDIT: Though published nearly twenty-five years ago, Henry Porter's book Lies, Damned Lies and Some Exclusives is a good introduction to the way the Press manipulate your understanding of the news by simple tricks of presentation and language. The title was going to say "... and Sun Exclusives" until Murdoch's organisation obtained an injunction. 'Nuff said
Last edited by NickFitz; 22 January 2009, 02:32.Comment
-
Nick, that's getting for "tin-foil hat" paranoia territory.When will people like you ever grasp that the way the news is constructed and presented to you is deliberately engineered so as to provoke a Pavlovian response from you for the purpose of furthering the agenda of those who exploit your credulity to their own ends?
Either people accept the news as it's reported to them, or they treat all news articles as 100% fake.
What's it going to be ?Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C.S. LewisComment
-
Being asked to talk to the Treasury Select Committee is hardly "being investigated" is it?
Comment
-
It's not as clear cut as you suggest.Originally posted by Board Game Geek View PostNick, that's getting for "tin-foil hat" paranoia territory.
Either people accept the news as it's reported to them, or they treat all news articles as 100% fake.
What's it going to be ?
It's not about what is reported, but about how it is reported.
As a simple example, consider these two sentences about the same event:The second version carries overtones suggesting that said protestors are some kind of threat to the orderly governance of the nation, verging on being a mob. This will tend to influence readers who believe in respect for the State and for the rule of Law against them and, by extension, their cause.
"Protestors marched to Westminster."
"Protestors marched on Westminster."
Yet both sentences report the same fact, and they differ only in one two-letter word (and in only one letter).
Of course this is a very obvious example. Read Porter's book for more subtle and egregious cases.Last edited by NickFitz; 22 January 2009, 05:00.Comment
-
... or try a non-partisan reading of the Guardian and the Telegraph together for a few days! Both are fine newspapers, both firmly in the centrist democratic political camp, both aimed at educated middle-class readers, both are patriotic and internationalist at the same time.... but the same news items will be reported subtly differently in each.Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
"Police accused of bias"
"Police refute accusation of bias"
etc.Comment
-
I think he had it spot on. The art is to read between the lines and view all information as relevant to the context in which it's delivered.Originally posted by Board Game Geek View PostNick, that's getting for "tin-foil hat" paranoia territory.
Either people accept the news as it's reported to them, or they treat all news articles as 100% fake.
What's it going to be ?...my quagmire of greed....my cesspit of laziness and unfairness....all I am doing is sticking two fingers up at nurses, doctors and other hard working employed professionals...
Comment
-
Maybe those who can't tell the difference should not be allowed to vote?Originally posted by Board Game Geek View PostNick, that's getting for "tin-foil hat" paranoia territory.
Either people accept the news as it's reported to them, or they treat all news articles as 100% fake.
What's it going to be ?
Sun reading x factor watching unwashed proletariat scumbags.Comment
-
Er, aren't those exactly the people that voted in Maggie, of whom you are so fond?Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
Comment
All times are GMT. This page was generated at 09:46.
Comment