Posted on 06/10/2022 7:29:34 AM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
There is a certain amount of irony in the fact that now I am much older, and I hope wiser and better informed, I am never invited to give my opinion on TV or radio shows or for the press.
The mainstream media prefers its experts to stick to the official and accepted line on whatever topic is under discussion.
What viewers, listeners and readers don’t know is that many so-called experts have been bought and paid for, and when they open their mouths they are merely saying what they’ve been told to say by their employers.
The drug industry has an army of doctors who will say whatever they are required to say – in return for a large cheque, a holiday abroad or a new television set. Special agencies offer these so-called experts to media groups who are looking for someone who can provide an apparently expert view.
Television reporters, radio presenters and newspaper journalists like the fact that these experts work free of charge because they are paid by their sponsors. The ‘experts’ are known as ‘rent a quote experts’.
This is today’s Dilbert comic strip.
Top men, top men.
Any article with “experts claim” or “experts say” is immediately doubted by this sixty-some year old.
Yup! “Experts” don’t impress me none. Who the hell designates those jerks as “experts” anyway? The clowns and DNC toadies in the “media”?
Hell yeah. That's gotta be worth at least $1,000.
Pretty on brand for a Daily Grift author - or poster - to think a new TV is what Big Pharma uses for bribes.
So “the Chinese Army” will start a war if Taiwan declares Independence? Hmmmmm? Very interesting. They make it sound like it operates on it’s own.
Ha! You posted in the wrong thread. Never mind. Humblegunner will be here soon to set you straight. He’s the site cop.
X = the algebraic unknown
Spurt = insignificant drip
Expert = unknown, insignificant drip
But if it’s according to “experts”....
Any expert unwilling to openly meet with supporters of dissenting opinions (e.g., data misinterpretation, etc)is a shill. He is not a scientist, no matter what rotten Uni gave him a diploma.
By defn, scientists MUST consider (not ignore) conflicting data. If you don’t do that, you are trash.
ya don’t say.
Every publicized prognostication has a single characteristic in common with every other publicized prognostication — IT’S WRONG! The only correct prognostication is a secret because that bright guy is too busy making bundles of money for being right.
About 20 years ago I was called to jury duty for a case where the stepmother of a teenager was suing the parents of another teenager. One kid got on the ATV of another and promptly ran it into a tree killing himself. His stepmother was trying to cash in on the deal. Her lawyer called an "expert" witness who had calculated the lifetime earnings of the teenager and came up with some ridiculous number that must have assumed he was going straight from the ghettos of small town Mississippi to become a Wall Street hedge fund manager. The jury was evidently supposed to reimburse the stepmother for his lost earnings. Having lived in the area most of my life I had a different view of his earnings potential because I knew far too many teenagers like him. He'd mostly likely be in jail for breaking and entering before he was 18, father a half dozen wards of the state before he was 25, and OD on drugs by the time he was 30. The expert didn't hold much sway with the jury and we awarded them nothing.
“The pros from Dover.”
An expert is anyone who lives more than 50 miles away and carries a briefcase.
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.