_BiB_ Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 The way you do. It's your sources of information. I basically never watch the news, especially network. Last night, I had Nightline on TV. Subject was the guys who refused the convoy order, and a few other Iraq tidbits. Ted Koppel is a seriously poor excuse for a newsman. So is his staff. It has been a long time since I have seen anything that badly slanted, biased and invented. The entire message was not to inform, it was to say "Bush Bad". If this is how some of you get your information, well, it clears a lot up for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerjamhead Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 You ought to hear it when they announce the recent polls: "Bush barely ahead in XXX, 52-48." "Kerry ahead in XXX, 48-47." "Bush with a slim margin in XXX, 51-46." "Kerry leading Bush in XXX, 49-46." I've only been able to watch the alphabet channels and PBS over the last week because my DTV doesn't get hooked up until the 1st. Just in time for the idiocy that will kick off on the 2nd. Can't wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 The way you do. It's your sources of information. I basically never watch the news, especially network. Last night, I had Nightline on TV. Subject was the guys who refused the convoy order, and a few other Iraq tidbits. Ted Koppel is a seriously poor excuse for a newsman. So is his staff. It has been a long time since I have seen anything that badly slanted, biased and invented. The entire message was not to inform, it was to say "Bush Bad". If this is how some of you get your information, well, it clears a lot up for me. 77333[/snapback] I have the Network news programs on my ignore list. I only watch the Networks for football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 I don't watch TV news at all - not CNN, not MSNBC, not FAUX. I may watch CSPAN on occasion. Instead I read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 You ought to hear it when they announce the recent polls: "Bush barely ahead in XXX, 52-48." "Kerry ahead in XXX, 48-47." "Bush with a slim margin in XXX, 51-46." "Kerry leading Bush in XXX, 49-46." I've only been able to watch the alphabet channels and PBS over the last week because my DTV doesn't get hooked up until the 1st. Just in time for the idiocy that will kick off on the 2nd. Can't wait. 77359[/snapback] That's how the cover Israel too. "16 Israelis die in suicide bombing." "3 Palestinians killed by Israeli missles." The difference between 'die' and 'killed' is significant as is the fact that the suicide bombings are rarely attributed to anyone. Like they just happen on their own.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 I don't watch TV news at all - not CNN, not MSNBC, not FAUX. I may watch CSPAN on occasion. Instead I read. 77375[/snapback] yea, but when what you read are rags like the NYtimes. LAtimes, the guardian, etc.. whats the difference between them and the network news programs? They both use eachother as sources of the same bias information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 That's how the cover Israel too. "16 Israelis die in suicide bombing." "3 Palestinians killed by Israeli missles." The difference between 'die' and 'killed' is significant as is the fact that the suicide bombings are rarely attributed to anyone. Like they just happen on their own.... 77394[/snapback] or better yet...."17 people died, including the bomber", as if we should feel sorry for him too. It's sad, but true. Media does influence people. I've watched my own mother turn from an intelligent, reasoning moderate conservative (for about 60 years) to a blathering liberal due to two things: Daily reading of the DNC/NY Times and the influence of my clueless little sister, who happens to be a radical lefty. Now she thinks Michael Moore is a reasonable person. Scary stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 You ought to hear it when they announce the recent polls: "Bush barely ahead in XXX, 52-48." "Kerry ahead in XXX, 48-47." "Bush with a slim margin in XXX, 51-46." "Kerry leading Bush in XXX, 49-46." I've only been able to watch the alphabet channels and PBS over the last week because my DTV doesn't get hooked up until the 1st. Just in time for the idiocy that will kick off on the 2nd. Can't wait. 77359[/snapback] hey whats up man, you having fun out there? At least you don't have to put up with the ridiculous political ads that we have to here in Ohio. I can't wiat until Nov 3rd, when we will once again be free from this crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerjamhead Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 hey whats up man, you having fun out there? At least you don't have to put up with the ridiculous political ads that we have to here in Ohio. I can't wiat until Nov 3rd, when we will once again be free from this crap. 77451[/snapback] Doing good Rich, thanks for asking. I'll PM you with some updates. The recent big add out here is the Michael J. Fox plug for prop 71 Stem Cell Research. I'm so tired of people getting on board with a cause only after they have been personally afflicted by some disease. My brother has been a type 1 diabetic since he was nine months old, but I still can't jump on the bandwagon here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 hey whats up man, you having fun out there? At least you don't have to put up with the ridiculous political ads that we have to here in Ohio. I can't wiat until Nov 3rd, when we will once again be free from this crap. 77451[/snapback] That's one good thing about having elections decided by a small handful of states (not including mine) and being ignored by the candidates....no political ads! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Funny how each side hears things completely different from the same source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 That's why I split my news viewing time between FOX and CNN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 And your source for news is . . . ? Any recommendations from the well informed and "right" thinking people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Kinda like that old joke about how a newspaper headline might read if a meterorite were about to strike the earth and kill all life "WORLD ABOUT TO END! WOMEN AND MINORITIES MOST AFFECTED!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 And your source for news is . . . ? Any recommendations from the well informed and "right" thinking people? 77628[/snapback] My sources are quite varied, moo moo. It would actually take way to long to list them all. Suffice that they are a mix of conservative, liberal and sometimes if I can find one-neutral. I peruse a lot of international news-links. My concentration is defense, so I use Janes for a lot of info. They have some excellent White Papers on file. I also use the direct links to the agencies and their databases that I have questions about. I'm an avid listener of NPR. I watch FOX and CNN, the news-not the shows. When faced with something I'm unfamiliar with, I will do a search string and read maybe ten or fifteen articles on a subject from both obviously biased and somewhat unbiased sources to try to get a flavor of what really might have happened. I sometimes get my information by making a phone call. I also rely heavilly on the non-public sources I use in my work. Plus other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 They don't all watch the news or read the mainstream papers. You'd be surprised how informed the punk/hardcore community is this time. They don't usually get polled by the Zogby-like pollsters, but they are pissed and they will vote this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 and sometimes if I can find one-neutral. 77653[/snapback] i would be interested in which ones you personally consider to be neutral. (seriously) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 i would be interested in which ones you personally consider to be neutral. (seriously) 77724[/snapback] That's why I used the phrasing I did. Hard to find. I consider Janes to be neutral. My method is to use the"media" to get or become aware of the situation, then if I have interest or reason to, I generally go directly to the applicable sources for actual information, when possible. If there is a public health issue, I'll look to the CDC, the AMA and some of the scientific journals to get info. The most actually neutral sources I use are unfortunately very limited access. I have access to classified "news" and search engines that pretty well just give a "this is what happened", without an opinion attached. If you work in an area where this kind of stuff is applicable, one can't work with "opinion slanted" information. These are not intelligence channels, they are actual news sites to include things like financial information, political information, etc. Actual trade publications are the closest I can name to non-spun information, for the same reasons. If one has to work with information-one needs information, not opinion. Questions on the oil situation? Dozens of trade and market publications that have pretty clean info. One doesn't hedge futures based on opinion, one does is based on facts. Just my way, but I am a firm believer in using multiple sources, including sources I don't agree with. I see no other way to get anything approaching an "informed" opinion. When I can get to it, I'll PM you some links from my home computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 My sources are quite varied, moo moo. It would actually take way to long to list them all. Suffice that they are a mix of conservative, liberal and sometimes if I can find one-neutral. I peruse a lot of international news-links. My concentration is defense, so I use Janes for a lot of info. They have some excellent White Papers on file. I also use the direct links to the agencies and their databases that I have questions about. I'm an avid listener of NPR. I watch FOX and CNN, the news-not the shows. When faced with something I'm unfamiliar with, I will do a search string and read maybe ten or fifteen articles on a subject from both obviously biased and somewhat unbiased sources to try to get a flavor of what really might have happened. I sometimes get my information by making a phone call. I also rely heavilly on the non-public sources I use in my work. Plus other stuff. 77653[/snapback] Except for not reading "Jane's" we have a very similar source pool. Kinda of blows the "way you think" dig, don't it? Or is there another explanation? (he asked knowing it was a hanging curveball . . .) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 Except for not reading "Jane's" we have a very similar source pool. Kinda of blows the "way you think" dig, don't it? Or is there another explanation? (he asked knowing it was a hanging curveball . . .) 77874[/snapback] Dig? That was a general comment. I didn't say "RCow". If you're going to try to convince me that there aren't several people who get their info from a single source-mostly TV, and that they won't do anything besides get their 30 second feeding-you'll have a hard time.Goes for both sides. And I will go back to my original statement. That show was hopelessly, shamelessly biased. As I said, I don't watch much network news, but when I have I have yet to see the same type of biased manipulation against Kerry. It's against Bush. Hence, the post was aimed at the libs. Shoe fits? Wear it. If it don't it don't. I just have to shake my head at how far down into the mud this country will go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts