Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Sincinnatislink]

So are you agreeing that he should insult me rather than talk with me?

I'm confused.

[Sincinnatislink]

[daskalos]

Here's a thing about headlines most people don't know, when it comes to actual printed newspapers. See, there's this space that they have to fill, and they pretty much have to fill it. It can be real pain to find enough-but-not-too-many words to fill that space.

I'm willing to give that mean ol' Gray Lady a pass on this one, especially since I agree with Sincinnatislink's assessment.

And regarding Rumsfeld's exit being a matter of the elections and not opinion polls, it was widely reported afterward that the decision had been made some time before the election.

By my favvvorite thing on this thread was Sincinnatislink's being ridiculed for being able to punctuate. That was cool. Who do you think you are, Sincinnatislink, using all those fancy-shmancy periods and commas and things. Why doncha go get a degree in linguistics or something stupid like that? What a loser.

[ChopChaeJoe]

[daskalos]

I've only heard Gray Lady in terms of the NYT, but I'm old and my memory could be playing tricks on me.

[stevemcgarrett]

Good thread.

Michael Savage, whose views I sometimes endorse, refers to the NYT as the "Old York Times." The paper he grew up reading he now holds in contempt.

It's gone the way of most British papers in that news analysis and hard news are no longer differentiated, especially when covering politics.

NYT has a decidedly liberal bent and has for three decades, getting much worse since Arthur Jr. took over.

But of course liberals don't see the slant, focusing their partisan wrath instead only on Fox News.

[daskalos]

One of the things I've noticed about people who complain about the liberal bias in the media is that what they mostly seem to mean is, if you don't spout the conservative party line du jour, you're liberal. (With a sneer and a capital L.)

By that definition, my mantra has always been, "God Bless the Liberal Media."

[desultude]

[ChopChaeJoe]

Yep, New york Times, the Gray Lady. It may seem to have a left bent to some, the wall Street Journal may seem rightward bent to others, both are excellent papers and together should give an American take on the world.

Pretty much any television journalism is far, far below in objectivity. Fox news is horribly skewed to the right, but it's fantasy to think that news can be void of any bias; any perspective has bias.

[Sincinnatislink]

[Anyong Bluth]

Speaking as somebody who...

a) works as a financial journalist, and so gets the capitalist line at work pretty much all day, every day

and

b) personally and politically leans a wee bit to the left

...I like to read both the WSJ and the NYT every day. You can argue who slants which way and how much all you want to (and it's a popular move among politicians these days to undermine the fourth estate, one can't help but wonder if Woodward and Bernstein would be dismissed as having a partisan axe to grind if they came out with some Watergate-type shit nowadays, everything is so polarized, then again if they were in the '00s they'd probably be writing blogs) but in the end it's the citizen's job to be objectively informed, and in this day and age that means getting a variety of sources.

Accusing somebody of bias is counterproductive; find a news source you totally agree with and find one you totally loath and read both of them. Every day.

Also, the NYT is by far the finest English newspaper in the world.

[Anyong Bluth]

Like this gem:

http://users2.wsj.com/lmda/do/checkLogin?mg=wsj-users2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB117063961235897853.html%3Fmod%3Dtodays_us_nonsub_page_one

If I didn't read the Journal I'd miss out on stuff like this!