Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FSETH
JCL, in all seriousness, why did you feel the need to spin everything, overlook the major points in this article and attack this persons personal character? Regardless of what he has said or done in his life doesnt negate the truths he has written about. There is so much more to this article than what you brought up. Such as;
-The clearly left leaning media bias in the U.S. (Example, we are more interested in Palins clothes than this)
-The fact that we are primarily in this mortgage/real estate situation on the shoulders of a Democratic policy that was loosened by another fellow Democrat.
-The fact that McCain and the republicans warned the Democrats on Fannie Mae years ago and they refused to cooperate and fix the problem.
The whole point of this article is that if the shoe were on the other foot it would be a completely different situation, which is true. Whether a Democrat or a Republican wrote the article is inconsequential, IMO. What should matter is the point of the article.
It is a great article and this is what people should be talking about.
|
I think that he is an interesting character. That is what I spoke about. I think the article would have been stronger without the "the writer is a Democrat" byline, that was my point.
You can call them all truths, but that is through your particular lens. I used phrases like "interesting article", "nothing wrong with these views", and "interesting that it is all about sub-prime mortgages and no mention of the CDS market". Any opinion on those statements?
I have posted previously (within the past two days) that I think that the US entertainment news media is biased in both directions, it depends on which channel or URL you follow. I see lots of bias.
Palin's clothes? Please. Nobody is interested in Palin's clothes. They are interested in the contrast between the hockey mom image that is being sold, and her campaign's actions. Nothing to do with clothes. They look quite nice actually, IMO.
"On the shoulders of the Democratic Party"? OK. I think there is quite enough blame to go around on both parties, I think they both did it, but if you like, let's blame one of them and not the other. That isn't biased.
As to the point of the article, I saw it as a blast against poor quality journalism. We have raging agreement on that point. I think it would have been more effective overall if the writer had not sunk into partisan politics, and had pointed out the nonsense on both sides. That would have been a journalistic triumph. Instead, he said journalism is terrible, and it is one-sided. He immediately went into the partisan mode that he claims to despair over. I thought that was unfortunate.
He got to sell more articles that way, because the Democrats will line up to hate him, and the Republicans will feel good because they are personally validated. Fine, but that isn't journalism.
I think that everything we believe is filtered through our own lens, our own values, our own understanding. You probably believe I am a Democrat, or I would guess so from your spin accusations. Nope. What I believe isn't relevant though. I was talking about journalism, not politics.
Thanks for your comments.