test
Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age:45
Posts: 5,396
Location: International House of Paincakes...

23 Jan 2011, 10:12 pm

Would be nice if it could go back to being a reasonable, honest, unbiased news source—like it was several years ago.

...but that will never happen. No one cares about the truth anymore. They just want propaganda that reinforces their own particular world view. It's not very useful for a healthy democracy, but it is comforting. :roll:


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age:32
Posts: 9,745

23 Jan 2011, 10:35 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
Would be nice if it could go back to being a reasonable, honest, unbiased news source—like it was several years ago.

...but that will never happen. No one cares about the truth anymore. They just want propaganda that reinforces their own particular world view. It's not very useful for a healthy democracy, but it is comforting. :roll:


It was never unbiased, it was just better at hiding its bias until they really went off the deep end. Most Journalists in United States would be classified as liberals, and the funny thing is they don't even realize that fact.



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age:45
Posts: 5,396
Location: International House of Paincakes...

23 Jan 2011, 11:11 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Would be nice if it could go back to being a reasonable, honest, unbiased news source—like it was several years ago.

...but that will never happen. No one cares about the truth anymore. They just want propaganda that reinforces their own particular world view. It's not very useful for a healthy democracy, but it is comforting. :roll:


It was never unbiased, it was just better at hiding its bias until they really went off the deep end. Most Journalists in United States would be classified as liberals, and the funny thing is they don't even realize that fact.


Are you kidding me? In the age of for profit TV NEWS bias is just a marketing gimmick. Reporters will have whatever bias (or not) the man signing their paycheck tells them to have.

Do you really think those poor news readers at FOX want to say silly crap like "homicide bomber" when they do a story about some Middle East suicide attack?

It’s all about branding and pandering to their audience because that's how they make money. They couldn't give a crap less if what they're reporting is biased right or left or if it’s accurate or not. They just want to keep the mouth breathers watching and the ad revenues up. And they’ll do whatever it takes to make that happen.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age:78
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

24 Jan 2011, 10:37 am

GoonSquad wrote:

Do you really think those poor news readers at FOX want to say silly crap like "homicide bomber" when they do a story about some Middle East suicide attack?

.


What would you call someone who blows himself up in order to kill other people?

ruveyn



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age:45
Posts: 5,396
Location: International House of Paincakes...

24 Jan 2011, 10:44 am

ruveyn wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:

Do you really think those poor news readers at FOX want to say silly crap like "homicide bomber" when they do a story about some Middle East suicide attack?

.


What would you call someone who blows himself up in order to kill other people?

ruveyn


The same thing reasonable, intelligent people have been calling them for 60+ years, a suicide bomber.

A homicide bomber could be anyone who sets a bomb for the purpose of committing homicide, whether they kill themselves or not.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk! :P


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus