tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post9123890531479066590..comments2024-01-22T04:45:58.881+02:00Comments on Simply Jews: Our Weasel Of The Week Nominees!!GideonSworthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13951672633294843881noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post-7060217152212123002015-02-11T13:35:49.666+02:002015-02-11T13:35:49.666+02:00Well, I prefer to read several sources on same sub...Well, I prefer to read several sources on same subject. Not that it helps much sometimes... <br /><br />As for WaPo: they do seem to become less administration - serving lately.SnoopyTheGoonhttp://simplyjews.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post-63617180439496098722015-02-11T13:09:45.737+02:002015-02-11T13:09:45.737+02:00I've seen "straight reporting" so ra...I've seen "straight reporting" so rarely as to be convinced that it's an endangered species.<br /><br /><br />I agree with the prince/king. Journalists, especially American ones, ain't even close to objective. They only try to make you believe they are. I know. I did it for roughly 35 years---usually with mockery. Huh? I would say, turning to a fellow traveler, I must not have gotten the memo. Yuk, yuk. <br /><br /><br />All the time I was working with/for people who were strictly Democrats, reported for Democrats and their issues du jour, and because they despised Republicans with every bone in their bodies they voted Democrat. There was no objectivity whatsoever. Except when we claimed it for ourselves, as unlikely as it must have seemed to anyone who was paying attention.<br /><br /><br />The best you can hope for is to see both sides in the report, of about equal size and completeness, which you are more likely to get with Fox News than with Lyin' Brian's NBC or CNN. Or NYTimes or WaPo. Which is why they hate Fox News and mock it every chance they get.Dick Stanleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post-76818295279686016272015-02-11T08:39:13.944+02:002015-02-11T08:39:13.944+02:00It wasn't confusing at all and I would general...It wasn't confusing at all and I would generally agree with you, with one provision: of course, journalist can't be fully impartial and ideally objective, not where his/her opinion is concerned. But then there is reporting, where coverage of facts should be full and impartial, and this is my only personal measure of a journalist's worth. I would say there are quite a few folks in that profession who succeeded to set aside their political allegiance in favor of straight reporting. Their opinions came afterward, which is only fair.SnoopyTheGoonhttp://simplyjews.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post-49547416927848486432015-02-11T01:15:23.161+02:002015-02-11T01:15:23.161+02:00Well in a general sense it's because it's ...Well in a general sense it's because it's a profession done by humans not angels. A human cannot be truly impartial, that is a quality reserved for the Divinity(s). Stanley can back me on this one or more likely correct me, but journalism in the past was very partisan in nature, the supposed "objectivity" is a relatively new idea, somewhat twentieth century. I personally don't mind biased journalism or journalists, it's the claim of some sort of sacred objectivity that's offensive to me. It's kind of like the controversy in Anthropology back in the 70's. Could the anthropologist obsererve from inside the group and be unbiased or must he always stay outside and lose the inside vantage point. I trust that is confusing enough.Sennacheribnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18234909.post-10384987157402400092015-02-10T23:12:52.307+02:002015-02-10T23:12:52.307+02:00My vote goes to Pres Obama. This was worse than t...My vote goes to Pres Obama. This was worse than the example given above:<br /><br />"It is entirely appropriate for the American people to be deeply <br />concerned when you've got a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead<br /> people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris,"BHChnoreply@blogger.com