Results 1 to 14 of 14
Thread: Oh Dear
-
31st August 2015, 10:55 PM #1GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Queensland
- Posts
- 613
Oh Dear
Oh Dear, is this really our future .
It's not April 01, but its got to be a joke, surely......
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/rel...-1227506726101Regards,
Bob
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
-
1st September 2015, 02:01 AM #2GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Port Huon
- Posts
- 373
-
1st September 2015, 09:32 AM #3Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 18
You did notice which august journal of record that article was in didn't you? Have a think about why that article was published. How many extra visitors to the site did it generate? (Hint - that's how Mr Murdoch make his money) Which buttons does it push for the reader? Here's a few - 'political correctness gone mad', 'gay rights', 'same sex marriage will be the ruin of the language' etc etc
-
1st September 2015, 09:37 AM #4
I think you are guilty of shooting the messenger here.
You obviously don't like News Corp (who does?) but at the end of the day they reported this, they didn't create it, the University of Tennessee did.
Now if you could provide some evidence that the University of Tennessee didn't create this then your response would have a bit more credibility.
As for News Corp making money out of reporting stories like this, isn't that what they, and every other media outlet, are in business for?
-
1st September 2015, 09:54 AM #5Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 18
I didn't claim that the story is not true - what you need to ask is why News Corp (or any other organisation) chose to publish that particular story. You give the answer yourself "News Corp make money out of reporting stories like this"
They do it get people worked up, waving their arms about and then sharing the link and get more visits to the site. Seems to have worked here.
The messenger here is not a neutral party just reporting facts - the bigger question is which facts they choose to report.
-
1st September 2015, 10:26 AM #6
Show me a media organisation that is what you call "neutral", they all have an agenda and report only what they want and even then put their own spin on it.
This applies to every media outlet in this country, and I'm sure also overseas. Doesn't matter whether it is print, TV, radio or online.
Even the so-called non-commercial outlets, such as the ABC, push their own agenda and only report what suits that agenda.
A classic example of this was the recent court case of Hockey vs Fairfax, it got lots of coverage in almost every media outlet, Fairfax had only a few lines and even then they worded it almost as if they won the case.
It is human nature to be biased and make money.
But at the end of the day we still have the power to select what we read, view or listen to, and then it goes through our own bias filter.
-
1st September 2015, 02:39 PM #7
Another example of (very) selective reporting
This was published on the ABC website this morning
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-0...airfax/6739624
What did Fairfax report?
Nothing that I can find.
-
1st September 2015, 04:36 PM #8SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Location
- Melbourne
- Age
- 80
- Posts
- 36
Why do you dislike Murdoch? he's rich and your not? He tries to tell you what to think? He changed his country?
I know this is bit away from the post but it would be interesting to hear some comments.
-
1st September 2015, 06:26 PM #9
Getting back on track I do not know why these terms need to be adopted.
I am yet to be convinced that it is necessary to be non gender specific.
-
1st September 2015, 11:22 PM #10Taking a break
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Melbourne
- Age
- 34
- Posts
- 108
Political correctness gone mad again. It reminds me of the gender neutral preschool in Sweden: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-14038419 (which brings up a whole world of potential problems for the kids)
Gender is binary. End of story. If you want to identify as the other one for whatever reason, that's fine (personally, I don't really get it, but live and let live) but there are only 2 options. Maybe 3 if you identify as neither (again, don't understand it but that's my take on it)
We're slowly destroying our language by trying so hard not to offend anyone and it's becoming a real joke. Go watch George Carlin's bit on "Soft Language" (WARNING: bit of bad language), I think it demonstrates it quite nicely.
By all means, discourage the use of genuinely offensive words/titles, but if you can't call a man a man and a woman a woman we might as well pack up and go home.
[/RANT]
-
1st September 2015, 11:45 PM #11GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- Helensburgh
- Posts
- 608
Fairfax had a fair bit on it earlier today and two are still up
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...31-gjc4j1.html
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...01-gjcdgp.html
and there was at least one video. Fairfax have been running an intensive campaign against the Libs since the last election and it does not appear that they are going to give up. I suppose if News backs the Liberal Government then Fairfax trying to shoot the Libs is some sort of balance. Maybe the Huffington Post is the answer....http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann...a&ir=AustraliaCHRIS
-
2nd September 2015, 09:42 AM #12
The ABC ran an interesting comparison between the Gillard govt comments on News Corp and the Abbott govt on Fairfax last night on the news.
Very striking, some of the comments were almost word for word the same.
History repeating itself?
Here is an interesting opinion piece on the ABC website, it makes some valid points
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-0...a-bias/6742332
-
2nd September 2015, 11:30 AM #13GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- Helensburgh
- Posts
- 608
I think it is more interesting that Fairfax did exactly the same thing.
CHRIS
-
2nd September 2015, 11:39 AM #14
Fairfax is in a race to the bottom with News Corp, used to love reading The Age but it is now an almost carbon copy of some of the News Corp papers all fluff and no substance.
The attack on an ex-SAS soldier standing for election in WA would surely rate as gutter journalism.
Having now lost 2 court cases for defamation in quick succession also speaks volumes about the "quality" of reporting in their papers.
They have obviously learned from News that scandal and mud throwing sells papers, hence makes money.
The tie up between Fairfax and ABC also speaks volumes for both.
Similar Threads
-
Oh Dear
By TEEJAY in forum Hatches, Matches & Dispatches. Birthday greetings and other Touchie-feelie stuff.Replies: 5Last Post: 24th December 2007, 09:19 PM -
Dear Wife
By wheelinround in forum JOKESReplies: 1Last Post: 7th December 2007, 12:23 PM -
Dear Ma and Pa
By silentC in forum JOKESReplies: 5Last Post: 16th June 2004, 09:02 PM
Bookmarks