|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 5:31 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
 |
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| Quote: |
How does ONE journalist or whoever wrote that equate to the entire staff at the NYT? The NYT is not some vast 'Borg collective' type institution.
BTW the writer is Dennis Hevesi, and according to newscred...he's got a 100% credibility rating. |
bill keller runs a meticulously edited newspaper. Apart from the opinion pieces, there are strict rules about when and how words can be used. in order for the word "unprecedented" to be used, for example, it has to satisfy a list of conditions the paper has set-out for everyone to follow.
you betray your ignorance when assuming that the writers have control over when and how words such as torture are used. |
I never made any such assumption.
And as for the NYT's lack of objectivity...what do you think about this article?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/04/us/politics/04detain.html?_r=1&ref=global-home |
correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the article you link just prove the point the author in the OP was trying to make? they talk about the "CIA's experiment in harsh interrogations". as andrew sullivan wrote in his 'daily dish', "you have a perfect demonstration of the NYT's double-standard. If Chinese do it to Americans, it's torture; if Americans do it to an American, it's 'harsh interrogation'."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/the-nyt-finally-prints-torture.html |
Read the third and fourth paragraph again, particularly these phrases.
[i] "The statement by the president could unnever the C.I.A interrogators Mr. Bush had authorized to use BRUTAL TACTICS..." [/i(Capitals are mine)
Brutal tactics=torture, wouldn't you say?
[i] "But the exchange was a harbinger of the conflict between the coercive interrogations and the United States' historical stance against torture."
Now think about this. If the NYT's stance was that these "coercive interrogations were NOT torture, how could they say that there was a conflict between them and the U.S' "historical stance against torture"
Gotta read between the lines, there.
Also consider this. Coming out and saying that the U.S is torturing people could lead to press passes being revoked, libel lawsuits and the like. A major newspaper has to be very careful and obtain conclusive and convincing proof which meets the standard of evidence in a court of law before making any allegations like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 6:25 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| Quote: |
[i] "The statement by the president could unnever the C.I.A interrogators Mr. Bush had authorized to use BRUTAL TACTICS..." [/i(Capitals are mine)
Brutal tactics=torture, wouldn't you say? |
nope. torture is torture. what's so hard about using this word, when they have no qualms about applying it to what china does to americans?
| Quote: |
[i] "But the exchange was a harbinger of the conflict between the coercive interrogations and the United States' historical stance against torture."
Now think about this. If the NYT's stance was that these "coercive interrogations were NOT torture, how could they say that there was a conflict between them and the U.S' "historical stance against torture"
Gotta read between the lines, there. |
look, i get your point. BUT WHY CAN'T THEY JUST CALL IT TORTURE!! words matter!
| Quote: |
| Also consider this. Coming out and saying that the U.S is torturing people could lead to press passes being revoked, libel lawsuits and the like. A major newspaper has to be very careful and obtain conclusive and convincing proof which meets the standard of evidence in a court of law before making any allegations like that. |
so you're an apologist for a cowardly servile press? but their press passes could be revoked, and there would be lawsuits! isn't the media's job to rock the boat? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 6:47 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| Quote: |
[i] "The statement by the president could unnever the C.I.A interrogators Mr. Bush had authorized to use BRUTAL TACTICS..." [/i(Capitals are mine)
Brutal tactics=torture, wouldn't you say? |
nope. torture is torture. what's so hard about using this word, when they have no qualms about applying it to what china does to americans?
| Quote: |
[i] "But the exchange was a harbinger of the conflict between the coercive interrogations and the United States' historical stance against torture."
Now think about this. If the NYT's stance was that these "coercive interrogations were NOT torture, how could they say that there was a conflict between them and the U.S' "historical stance against torture"
Gotta read between the lines, there. |
look, i get your point. BUT WHY CAN'T THEY JUST CALL IT TORTURE!! words matter!
| Quote: |
| Also consider this. Coming out and saying that the U.S is torturing people could lead to press passes being revoked, libel lawsuits and the like. A major newspaper has to be very careful and obtain conclusive and convincing proof which meets the standard of evidence in a court of law before making any allegations like that. |
so you're an apologist for a cowardly servile press? but their press passes could be revoked, and there would be lawsuits! isn't the media's job to rock the boat? |
NO! The media's job is to get their facts straight and report the story accurately, with as little bias as possible. The media's job is NOT to be a muckraker and report stories that may be factually inaccurate simply for the sake of "rocking the boat." That's what blogs and other non-professionals do.
If they don't have all the facts or evidence then of course they are going to use euphemisms and qualifiers. This has been standard practice for a very long time...why are you getting all outraged about it just now? And why are you singling out the NYT for this behaviour?
Last edited by TheUrbanMyth on Mon May 11, 2009 6:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 6:48 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Quote: |
From April 1953 through May 1955, Colonel Fischer � then an Air Force captain � was held at a prison outside Mukden, Manchuria. For most of that time, he was kept in a dark, damp cell with no bed and no opening except a slot in the door through which a bowl of food could be pushed. Much of the time he was handcuffed. Hour after hour, a high-frequency whistle pierced the air.
So that's torture now? To use the prevailing American mindset: a room that doesn't meet the standards of a Hilton and some whistling in the background is torture? My neighbor whistles all the time; does that mean he's torturing me? It's not as though Fischer had his eyes poked out by hot irons or was placed in a coffin-like box with bugs or was handcuffed to the ceiling.
|
This is a dumb statement "my neighbor whistles all the time, does that mean he's torturing me?"
There is a big difference between someone whistling a tune and having a mechanical device blow a high frequency note for hours on end. And having a dark damp cell with no bed is described as "a room that doesn't meet the standards of the Hilton"?
I propose we put everybody who doesn't think this is torture in the same conditions and see how quickly they change their tune. It's very easy to sit behind a computer in a comfortable easy chair and criticize the men and women of the armed forces who give their lives, so people can take this for granted. The person who wrote the article would profit from a few months of being in the captain's shoes. |
Hahaha, you didn't get it, did you. The person knew full well that the Chinese 'whistling' was torture. He was taking a potshot at those who similarly dismissed US torture techniques, such as playing loud heavy metal music for hours and hours on end. (Some) Americans, including some posters here, scoffed at the idea that such techniques were torture. Some even scoffed at the idea that waterboarding was torture.
Excellent thread btw. |
I'm afraid, Madame, that you are the one that doesn't get it. Making light of someone's torture for one's personal agenda may not be a negative in your books but it is mine. |
Sigh. With you I'm always reminded of those puzzled students who always took just a little bit longer...
He wasn't making fun of the American's experience. He was being ironic, employing the same kind of nonsense that was used by the 'critics' to dismiss American torture as trivial stuff. He did it to make a point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Quote: |
From April 1953 through May 1955, Colonel Fischer � then an Air Force captain � was held at a prison outside Mukden, Manchuria. For most of that time, he was kept in a dark, damp cell with no bed and no opening except a slot in the door through which a bowl of food could be pushed. Much of the time he was handcuffed. Hour after hour, a high-frequency whistle pierced the air.
So that's torture now? To use the prevailing American mindset: a room that doesn't meet the standards of a Hilton and some whistling in the background is torture? My neighbor whistles all the time; does that mean he's torturing me? It's not as though Fischer had his eyes poked out by hot irons or was placed in a coffin-like box with bugs or was handcuffed to the ceiling.
|
This is a dumb statement "my neighbor whistles all the time, does that mean he's torturing me?"
There is a big difference between someone whistling a tune and having a mechanical device blow a high frequency note for hours on end. And having a dark damp cell with no bed is described as "a room that doesn't meet the standards of the Hilton"?
I propose we put everybody who doesn't think this is torture in the same conditions and see how quickly they change their tune. It's very easy to sit behind a computer in a comfortable easy chair and criticize the men and women of the armed forces who give their lives, so people can take this for granted. The person who wrote the article would profit from a few months of being in the captain's shoes. |
Hahaha, you didn't get it, did you. The person knew full well that the Chinese 'whistling' was torture. He was taking a potshot at those who similarly dismissed US torture techniques, such as playing loud heavy metal music for hours and hours on end. (Some) Americans, including some posters here, scoffed at the idea that such techniques were torture. Some even scoffed at the idea that waterboarding was torture.
Excellent thread btw. |
I'm afraid, Madame, that you are the one that doesn't get it. Making light of someone's torture for one's personal agenda may not be a negative in your books but it is mine. |
Sigh. With you I'm always reminded of those puzzled students who always took just a little bit longer...
He wasn't making fun of the American's experience. He was being ironic, employing the same kind of nonsense that was used by the 'critics' to dismiss American torture as trivial stuff. He did it to make a point. |
Well, you see it as being ironic...I see it as promoting a personal agenda. And why don't we leave your less able students out of this discussion, if that's all right with you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 8:33 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| Quote: |
| NO! The media's job is to get their facts straight and report the story accurately, with as little bias as possible. |
no argument there. what i am complaining about is the obvious bias demonstrated by the nytimes. when the chinese torture an american, they call it by its name. when americans torture, they use euphemisms and qualifiers.
| Quote: |
| The media's job is NOT to be a muckraker and report stories that may be factually inaccurate simply for the sake of "rocking the boat." That's what blogs and other non-professionals do. |
again, if they have called what the chinese did to Col. Fischer torture, then why not call what happened at gitmo torture? how would using this language be muckracking or factually inaccurate? by rocking the boat i meant not being afraid to upset the equilibrium if that's what was needed. enough with this servility and timidity.
| Quote: |
| If they don't have all the facts or evidence then of course they are going to use euphemisms and qualifiers. This has been standard practice for a very long time...why are you getting all outraged about it just now? And why are you singling out the NYT for this behaviour? |
they've more than enough facts and evidence. google 'torture memos'. and who says i'm getting all outraged about it just now? you know, i do have an existence outside of this thread. and as to my singling out the nytimes, i also posted an article that was pretty hard on david broder. but yeah, this thread focuses mainly on the nytimes. what of it? it is arguably the world's most important paper. isn't it right and just to take it to account when the situation warrants it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:35 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| ubermenzch wrote: |
| Quote: |
| NO! The media's job is to get their facts straight and report the story accurately, with as little bias as possible. |
no argument there. what i am complaining about is the obvious bias demonstrated by the nytimes. when the chinese torture an american, they call it by its name. when americans torture, they use euphemisms and qualifiers.
| Quote: |
| The media's job is NOT to be a muckraker and report stories that may be factually inaccurate simply for the sake of "rocking the boat." That's what blogs and other non-professionals do. |
again, if they have called what the chinese did to Col. Fischer torture, then why not call what happened at gitmo torture? how would using this language be muckracking or factually inaccurate? by rocking the boat i meant not being afraid to upset the equilibrium if that's what was needed. enough with this servility and timidity.
With Col.Fischer...we only have one side of the story. As for what happened at Gitmo there are two competing sides to hear. The prisoners there are allowed the freedom to practise their religion, they get three square meals a day (many of the prisoners GAINED WEIGHT at Gitmo). Also the prisoners (and their supporters) didn't help their cause by spreading false stories about what was happening there. Remember the infamous Koran flushing story...yeah the one that caused 17 deaths in Afghanistan alone? If one spins lies that cause a lot of deaths and suffering..I personally can't get worked up over the fact that one may have received some rough treatment/torture.
| Quote: |
| If they don't have all the facts or evidence then of course they are going to use euphemisms and qualifiers. This has been standard practice for a very long time...why are you getting all outraged about it just now? And why are you singling out the NYT for this behaviour? |
they've more than enough facts and evidence. google 'torture memos'. and who says i'm getting all outraged about it just now? you know, i do have an existence outside of this thread. and as to my singling out the nytimes, i also posted an article that was pretty hard on david broder. but yeah, this thread focuses mainly on the nytimes. what of it? it is arguably the world's most important paper. isn't it right and just to take it to account when the situation warrants it? |
They don't have all the facts and evidence. Names, dates, types of torture used...some people who've claimed torture have been quite vague when questioned on the details.
And as far as that goes I think brutal tactics pretty much amounts to calling it torture anyway. Why all the fuss over semantics (and that is all it is). I don't really think the people who were subjected to such interrogations cared whether it was called brutal tactics or torture.
Basically your argument is if that they don't call it torture or what YOU want to hear, then they are a cowardly and servile media. It's fine to have an opinion...but that doesn't make it so. What is FAR more important is that this information came to light, which by the NYT printing it, is the very definition of a NON-cowardly and servile media. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:56 pm Post subject: Re: the shocking hypocrisy of the new york times |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why all the fuss over...what amounts to semantics? I don't really think the people who were subjected to such interrogations cared whether it was called brutal tactics or torture. |
again.... i posted these links to show the hypocrisy of the nytimes. the fuss is over an obviously biased use of the word torture. according to the times and their usage of the term, when the chinese do it, it's torture. but when the americans do it, not torture. now i'm sure you're right and the people subjected to these interrogations didn't care what they were called. BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT! you continually insist on these increasingly ridiculous objections and distractions. the point is that the nytimes, an important and influential newspaper, has been shown to selectively use the word torture depending on who it is being done to and who is doing it. if that doesn't bother you, then i guess there's nothing left for us to talk about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/watch2.html
i like what they say about tim russert. i did feel it strange that he was made out to be a saint, holding politicians feet to the fire. an obvious propagandist!
the mainstream media are generally spineless, and they are as much to blame as the bankers and wall street traders and politicians for the mess we find ourselves in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Interested
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thread reminds me of that delightful video of Hitchen's finding out that waterboarding is in fact....torture!
Believe Me, It�s Torture
And check out the video. It's hilarious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
