Posted on 06/29/2011 6:54:11 AM PDT by Neoavatara
Transformers: Dark of the Moon, the third in the Transformers series, is in some ways the perfect summer movie. A movie where you can turn off your brain, ignore reality, and simply enjoy sugar sweet Hollywood mayhem.
The movie starts with a basic concept: that the space race in the Cold War was focused on reaching the moon first, not for its scientific achievement, but to obtain alien technology that both the Soviets and Americans secretly knew had crashed on the dark side of the moon millenia ago. Americans, led by Neil Armstrong, get there first...but keep the information hidden.
(Excerpt) Read more at neoavatara.com ...
No, Darrell. The old media has proved beyond any shadow of any doubt that it lacks credibility. If you can't see that is the problem, I can't help you.
I have made a semi-crusade encouraging us all to the avoid profanity. Not much success. It's getting worse and worse on the board.
I think you don’t believe in community standards.
We may be talking apples and oranges.
When I read an article in the New York Times, I expect it to be well-researched and to be written by a professional who in most cases has spent many years learning to understand his beat. I expect it will have been edited by multiple people not only for spelling and grammar but also for style, for facts, and for potential legal concerns.
I also expect the article will have been written by somebody who has a filter for what he considers to be credible, and even if the reporter is personally neutral and not particularly biased against what I believe, his standards of what he considers newsworthy will be greatly influenced by the liberal leadership of the newspaper.
One county over from where I live, the local daily newspaper is owned by a retired colonel in the Missouri National Guard who was a Navy pilot in Vietnam, is a strongly conservative Republican, and agrees with me on most issues of politics. Most of his staff are moderate to conservatives. But do they have the training and skills of the New York Times staff? Do they have access to the resources of New York Times? No way — but since many of them have worked there a decade or more, they may know their beats very, very well.
Now change that to a blogger who has no research staff at all and no training and just posts his opinions about things. I may agree with his opinions, but does he have anything to back them up? Is it any better than a letter to the editor or a guest editorial?
I read the New York Times regularly so I understand what the liberals who run our East Coast politics think and how they view the world. I know they have a filter and I need to keep that in mind when I read their work.
I think I would be naive not to think that the lack of resources available to a small newspaper and lack of training and experience of most bloggers — not all, but most — should be taken into consideration when I read their work. I may agree with them on politics, but if I'm reading John Smith's account of what happened at a city council meeting debating some hot-button ordinance, I sure want to know how long John Smith has spent at prior city council meetings getting to know the people and the issues. If the answer is that he's never been there before, it makes a difference how I read what he writes.
I expect it to be written by a propagandist out to destroy the country. Really.
But do they have the training and skills of the New York Times staff?
They have something the NYT does not have which is far, far, far, more important, namely a belief that truth exists.
The New York Times is worthless. CBS is worthless.
Actually, I take that back. They are worse than worthless. They are cancerous and corrosive. If they would disappear tomorrow we would not only not miss them but we would be happier for their non-existence.
Thank you, Don-O. I really, really appreciate your thread, which I had not seen before now.
I have said nothing on the profanity issue here because the culture of different boards varies and it's not my place to set the rules. I live outside a large Army installation and I am not unfamiliar with coarse language. However, I will never forget the time a retired Army master sergeant interrupted me and chewed me out for something I had just said.
His point was that there was no excuse for profanity. It may make us feel mean and tough, but it doesn't convince people we're right and may easily do the opposite.
The anonymity of the internet has not improved manners, and I think much of that is due to a lack of accountability for our actions.
Change that to a Gannett product. What's the difference?
Now change that to a blogger who has training and posts factual information hitherto unknown to his audience.
Are you saying they don't exist?
The rules here are very loosely enforced as far as the language. What my thread tries to do is to encourage folks to self-censor and use the riches of the English language for rhetorical strength.
The same old four or five dirty words are just passe'. Whatever power they may have had is gone from overuse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.