 |
| |
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Lets see..who's statements are generally more newsworthy? Those of any single UN member's representative, or the secretary general? Which one a news agency decided to headline does show what they think is more newsworthy..fine, you think what the iraqi guys said was more newsworthy..good for you. But until you can show some objective meausre that tells us all which is more newsworthy, all you can say is your bias is more popular among the news agencies. Wow, good for you! |
1. Yup, all things being equal the SG is more newsworthy then the statement of the FM of a medium sized country, But Kofi saying something bland, and repeating what hes been saying for a while, versus the FM of Iraq saying something as controversial as that? I mean i suppose everythings subjective at some level (; to whaleboy) but thats a pretty clear cut news judgement, no? I mean which caught YOUR eye more?
2. In the absence of objective criteria, one looks at the consensus of reliable judges. Which is more likely, that AP, Reuter AND Agence France Press are biased the one way, or that Auntie Beeb is biased the other way?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:32
|
|
[QUOTE] Originally posted by GePap
oops duplicate
Last edited by lord of the mark on 17-12-2003 at 00:54
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
It can only be hours before lotm finds evidence the B.B.C. sponsored Saddam's sojourn in his hidey hole, and supplied him with a fibre optic cable B.B.C. World news channel link, and a massage from Peter Sissons.
And of course it's well known Osama bin Laden is on the board of governors of the B.B.C. , heavily disguised.
Makes you wonder why people who have actually lived in and fought against Third World dictatorships preferred the Beeb to other news channels. Perhaps because they were all in a socialist hegemonic world spanning conspiracy too! |
Oh, i like reading the BBC too. I read it fairly regularly, and often find it quite interesting. Much better than our lame Voice of America, which (idiocy!) is being cut back!!! I could certainly understand that folks in dictatorships would listen to it.
Just that on a SELECT range of issues theyve got a definite point of view. Which is not necessarily terrible, I suppose all news outlets have a viewpoint. Just that some folks seem to think the Beeb is some kind of gold standard of objectivity which it is not, imho.
and your exageration is a not particularly interesting rhetorical trick. Obviously I dont think Osama is on the board of the Beeb. Just as you dont think, say, Ariel Sharon is on the board of say, Fox news.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
uh Clem
|
 |
Born in the US; damned if I know where I live now
Nov 1999
time: 23:32
|
|
Wire stories are being revised constantly.
If the Iraqi FM says something, that's Story A.
Then, UN SG responds to Iraqi FM. A re-write at that point would probably put SG first, with the second or third paragraph giving a summary of what FM had said to draw this response. That's because at this point, SG's statement is new. Writer assumes that readers already have heard Story A or are aware of it.
As an anaolgy, consider Rumsfeld commenting on treatment and possible trial scenarios for Saddam Hussein, to pick something at random. It would be idiotic at this point to lead with the news that Saddam has been captured. We know that. The story would get right to Rummy's comments, and perhaps include a detail or two about the capture several paragraphs down.
So that's Story B: SG first, then Iraqi FM.
Then just to confuse things you will get summary or recap stories, typically including all details from the day. This is usually for evening news or some expanded news program. These programs include listeners who probably haven't heard any of the details from earlier, so you have to start at the beginning (usually -- but not always).
Without being able to tell when these stories were written, for whom, how frequently the sites update, and how much the writer actually knew at that point, the comparisons are meaningless. You're seeing canals on Mars, lotm.
This thread is proof of your own biases, however.
Last edited by uh Clem on 17-12-2003 at 07:02
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by uh Clem
This thread is proof of your own biases, however. |
Give this man a cookie.
Or a biscuit, as the case may be.
Or a, *ahem*, "tittybiscuit."
Last edited by Boris Godunov on 17-12-2003 at 06:11
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:32
|
|
FM Zebari
What type of music do they play?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by uh Clem
Wire stories are being revised constantly.
If the Iraqi FM says something, that's Story A.
Then, UN SG responds to Iraqi FM. A re-write at that point would probably put SG first, with the second or third paragraph giving a summary of what FM had said to draw this response. That's because at this point, SG's statement is new. Writer assumes that readers already have heard Story A or are aware of it.
As an anaolgy, consider Rumsfeld commenting on treatment and possible trial scenarios for Saddam Hussein, to pick something at random. It would be idiotic at this point to lead with the news that Saddam has been captured. We know that. The story would get right to Rummy's comments, and perhaps include a detail or two about the capture several paragraphs down.
So that's Story B: SG first, then Iraqi FM.
Then just to confuse things you will get summary or recap stories, typically including all details from the day. This is usually for evening news or some expanded news program. These programs include listeners who probably haven't heard any of the details from earlier, so you have to start at the beginning (usually -- but not always).
Without being able to tell when these stories were written, for whom, how frequently the sites update, and how much the writer actually knew at that point, the comparisons are meaningless. You're seeing canals on Mars, lotm.
This thread is proof of your own biases, however. |
all of the above is possible - yet I assume Frozzy, contest winner, picked correctly without even looking at the sites in question. I think most of us could have. Now thats only one instance, of course, and so by itself is not statistically meaningful. Its one part of a larger pattern others have noted, however.
A logical case can of course be made that the BBC is not at all biased on these matters. IMHO such arguments are about as compelling as the case that the sun and planets revolves around the earth - sure its possible, but the simpler explanation of the planets orbits is that they revolve around the sun.
If that makes you think me biased, so be it.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-12-2003 00:29
|