scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 If it was anywhere close to a worthy cause that I thought would actually defend this country, I would be there in a heartbeat. But yeah this whole Iraq crap is all about oil and money, and certainly not worth my life. The military doesn't need you any way. But you seem to fail to understand just how much oil and money mean to this country's freedom.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 and, of course, your analysis of the better candidate is balanced, right? The writer's source was AF Lt Colonel John Dramesi, a former POW who was tortured in Vietnam with McCain, and Chief War Planner for Europe as well as SAC Wing Commander. But it's just propaganda? I already answered that question. I am not attempting to pass my writing as journalism. I am not pretending to be an unbiased reporter. I am clearly saying that these are my views and my feelings. Additionally, everything I wrote is either fact or directly presented as my opinion. I don't see why that isn't obvious to you.
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 The military doesn't need you any way. But you seem to fail to understand just how much oil and money mean to this country's freedom. Ha! Yeah. Oil is important to the society we live in. Personally, I'm voting to reshape that society. McCain will be dead for 30 years when all his nuclear plants are up in running, and even in the best case scenario for him(two terms), he's out of office before the off-shore drilling begins to pay ITS dividends.
molson_golden2002 Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 The military doesn't need you any way. But you seem to fail to understand just how much oil and money mean to this country's freedom. I guess that's why we are printing so much money and wasting so much oil!
Kelly the Dog Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 I don't see why that isn't obvious to you. A blog, by definition, is opinion not straight reporting. Dickinson is both a contributing editor at Rolling Stone, and runs a blog there.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 Columnists are not journalists? Editors at major national publications that have a strong partisan bent like, say, National Review or Mother Jones or Rolling Stone, are not journalists? Granted, there is a huge difference between reporters (which is supposed to be balanced and factual) and columnists (which are not), but they are surely both journalists. I am not making any judgment on the validity of the article, I didn't read it. And I don't necessarily like the politics of magazines like Rolling Stone and Mother Jones. But you cannot, as a journalist, just deny that the writers and especially the editors for those publications are not journalists because you're diametrically opposed to their politics. That's not a very strong argument for your case. Granted, random posters on blogs are not "journalists". It's arguable as to whether just being a contributor to a major blog makes you a journalist. Myself, I am somewhat in between on that, there are good points either way. But Tim Dickinson is inarguably a journalist, just from his professional bio, and I have never read a word he has written. You are correct that my reference about journalists failed to take into account columnists. They are indeed journalists, but they too have journalistic standards to live by. A columnist who wants to claim journalistic integrity cannot make unsubstantiated claims. But, in my opinion, Tim Dickinson presents himself as a reporter pertaining to this article. Incidentally, when you read Dickinson's bio, you should take into consideration who gave him the titles he claims.
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 A blog, by definition, is opinion not straight reporting. Dickinson is both a contributing editor at Rolling Stone, and runs a blog there. And since Rolling Stone is not a blog forum...that...must...make him....a....
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 You are correct that my reference about journalists failed to take into account columnists. They are indeed journalists, but they too have journalistic standards to live by. A columnist who wants to claim journalistic integrity cannot make unsubstantiated claims. But, in my opinion, Tim Dickinson presents himself as a reporter pertaining to this article. Incidentally, when you read Dickinson's bio, you should take into consideration who gave him the titles he claims. Okay, let's not shy away from his Navy record (the heart of this post) to bicker about semantics.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 A blog, by definition, is opinion not straight reporting. Dickinson is both a contributing editor at Rolling Stone, and runs a blog there. This 10-page article is not a blog.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 And since Rolling Stone is not a blog forum...that...must...make him....a.... muckraker!
Kelly the Dog Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 You are correct that my reference about journalists failed to take into account columnists. They are indeed journalists, but they too have journalistic standards to live by. A columnist who wants to claim journalistic integrity cannot make unsubstantiated claims. But, in my opinion, Tim Dickinson presents himself as a reporter pertaining to this article. Incidentally, when you read Dickinson's bio, you should take into consideration who gave him the titles he claims. What journalistic alternate reality are you living in? Everyone of them do it almost every column. The partisan ones I mean (and again, I have no idea who Tim Dickinson is and still havent read anything he wrote). And I didn't read his bio from the Rolling Stone, I googled him and found out he was an editor of Mother Jones for 7 years and is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone as well as runs a blog on National Affairs there. Mother Jones is obviously far left wing but it's still a publication that has been around for 25 years. How can you not like a rag that fired Michael Moore for being an idiot?
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 Okay, let's not shy away from his Navy record (the heart of this post) to bicker about semantics. I was replying to an post about semantics. The heart of the original post was not Sen. McCain's Navy record. It was about him being the man who will see our war in Iraq through to an victorious conclusion. As for your comment about his record at the academy and the likelihood that he would have expelled if not for his father's rank, you're very possibly correct. But it is what it is and he went on to earn some very prestigious awards as an officer.
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 I was replying to an post about semantics. The heart of the original post was not Sen. McCain's Navy record. It was about him being the man who will see our war in Iraq through to an victorious conclusion. As for your comment about his record at the academy and the likelihood that he would have expelled if not for his father's rank, you're very possibly correct. But it is what it is and he went on to earn some very prestigious awards as an officer. Such as? BTW, right now I'm listening to a PULITZER PRIZE WINNING JOURNALISTS' account of McCain's shady POW record. I will send you the link to the transcript once it becomes relevant to this discussion.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 What journalistic alternate reality are you living in? Everyone of them do it almost every column. The partisan ones I mean (and again, I have no idea who Tim Dickinson is and still havent read anything he wrote). And I didn't read his bio from the Rolling Stone, I googled him and found out he was an editor of Mother Jones for 7 years and is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone as well as runs a blog on National Affairs there. Mother Jones is obviously far left wing but it's still a publication that has been around for 25 years. How can you not like a rag that fired Michael Moore for being an idiot? I take back what I wrote. Columnists who write slanted or one-sided articles are not acting in a journalistic manner. If that is all they do, they are not journalists. They are opinion writers. Journalists collect, write, edit and present news, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation. That's the definition plain and simple. You will be hard pressed to find a journalism professor who can keep a straight face and call Mother Jones a journalism body of work. Just because it calls itself that doesn't make it so.
Kelly the Dog Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 This 10-page article is not a blog. You were the one that denigrated his credentials by saying "he's a blogger from Huffington Post!" You are correct, however, that this particular article was a feature story and not a blog entry. But Rolling Stone has a history of its feature writers on politics having strong, relentless partisan bents. PJ O'Rourke ring a bell?
The Big Cat Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 I take back what I wrote. Columnists who write slanted or one-sided articles are not acting in a journalistic manner. If that is all they do, they are not journalists. They are opinion writers. Journalists collect, write, edit and present news, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation. That's the definition plain and simple. You will be hard pressed to find a journalism professor who can keep a straight face and call Mother Jones a journalism body of work. Just because it calls itself that doesn't make it so. This is great. Then, please, by all means, under your definition of non-leaning journalism, cite for us a source (other McCain stump speeches) which demonstrates McCain has the know-how, and/or plan to WIN IN IRAQ. You want to bring the troops home in victory, but everyone who purports this fails to define "victory" - this includes McCain.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 Such as? BTW, right now I'm listening to a PULITZER PRIZE WINNING JOURNALISTS' account of McCain's shady POW record. I will send you the link to the transcript once it becomes relevant to this discussion. Oh, just the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, Purple Heart. The Silver Star is nation's third highest award given for valor. I would be interested in hearing these journalists' account. I do enjoy solid journalistic work. I am a lot more open minded that my posts probably have you thinking. But you aren't presenting anything I have heard or read before.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 Journalists collect, write, edit and present news, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation. That's the definition plain and simple. What about sports journalists? If you look in the Buffalo News, even the guy who just does the recap of the game does it from a biased perspective. I don't think there's a journalist out there who doesn't inject a little of himself into what he writes.
Kelly the Dog Posted October 24, 2008 Posted October 24, 2008 I take back what I wrote. Columnists who write slanted or one-sided articles are not acting in a journalistic manner. If that is all they do, they are not journalists. They are opinion writers. Journalists collect, write, edit and present news, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation. That's the definition plain and simple. You will be hard pressed to find a journalism professor who can keep a straight face and call Mother Jones a journalism body of work. Just because it calls itself that doesn't make it so. So The Weekly Standard and National Review and others like it are not "a journalism body of work". Is that even a term? What you described are straight reporters, not journalists.
scribo Posted October 24, 2008 Author Posted October 24, 2008 You were the one that denigrated his credentials by saying "he's a blogger from Huffington Post!" You are correct, however, that this particular article was a feature story and not a blog entry. But Rolling Stone has a history of its feature writers on politics having strong, relentless partisan bents. PJ O'Rourke ring a bell? My point by brining up the author's affiliation with the HP is that he is blogging on very openly left-wing site. This guy does not try to hide his disdain for Republicans, so attacks from him have to be taken with a spoonful of salt.
Recommended Posts