News sources
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
I quit watching the news a few years ago. In order to do that I have to be ok with not being up on current events. In my situation I can be, and nobody knows I don't know what's going on. This keeps me at least not fretting about that. I have enough to be concerned with without the cares of the world.
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
'news' - it's interesting what passes for 'news' these days .. most Aus TV channels at the moment think its a) anything to do with the upcoming election b) anything to do with Royals, MAFS, Kardashians my 2c, c) none of the above (and YouTube would be the LAST source of 'truth') :-) 'g'
-
'news' - it's interesting what passes for 'news' these days .. most Aus TV channels at the moment think its a) anything to do with the upcoming election b) anything to do with Royals, MAFS, Kardashians my 2c, c) none of the above (and YouTube would be the LAST source of 'truth') :-) 'g'
Yeah, I don't even watch news much any more. I generally hear if Channel 7 does something particularly racist but otherwise, I don't pay attention. I do keep tabs on the political parties we have now (Anning is recruiting members, there's a ton of other fringe lunatic parties appearing), so I know about things like the recent flap over solar cars, but I don't watch any actual news source.
-
I quit watching the news a few years ago. In order to do that I have to be ok with not being up on current events. In my situation I can be, and nobody knows I don't know what's going on. This keeps me at least not fretting about that. I have enough to be concerned with without the cares of the world.
Thing is, something big, like Notre Dame, will appear on my feed. I generally know when someone famous dies the same way.
-
I quit watching the news a few years ago. In order to do that I have to be ok with not being up on current events. In my situation I can be, and nobody knows I don't know what's going on. This keeps me at least not fretting about that. I have enough to be concerned with without the cares of the world.
same, given up watching the news. even less watch the news talk/analysis shows because those are all about ratings rather than truth, don't wanna soapbox it but how often have these 'wise' analysts been wrong about the Don, brexit, China... wrong far more often than right even to the point of embellishing untruths? Farking clueless the lot of them. (Line them up next to_in front of (save bullets)_ the movie critics - another waste of skin that lot are.)
-
same, given up watching the news. even less watch the news talk/analysis shows because those are all about ratings rather than truth, don't wanna soapbox it but how often have these 'wise' analysts been wrong about the Don, brexit, China... wrong far more often than right even to the point of embellishing untruths? Farking clueless the lot of them. (Line them up next to_in front of (save bullets)_ the movie critics - another waste of skin that lot are.)
In fairness, people who were going to vote for Trump or Brexit, knew they were racists and lied to people taking polls.
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
Mostly old-school: 1. Local paper delivered every morning. 2. Sunday New York Times (also delivered). 3. Twitter 'Trends for you'.
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
As far as I can tell the only thing the news is interested in these days is the Bachelor and MAFS. I stick to PhysOrg.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
News stopped being news long ago, when it stopped being an obligation put on TV channels in return for broadcast slots and started having to make its own money. At that point, it was all over but the lying. You can't make money taking a nuanced approach to every issue based on the specifics. You make money by polarizing people and keeping them on your side of the playing field by any means necessary. Then of course enter the internet where every wingnut on the planet can hold forth with 'the truth'. Some of those may actually believe the non-sense they spew, and many are not different from the major 'news' outlets. Not that there aren't people in the news business who I'm sure would love to do real news in the old fashioned way, and there are probably some who manage to. But that's an expensive proposition and no one wants to pay for it anymore. The internet has screwed them just like it's screwed so many people. They can work themselves to a heart attack to chase down some major story, and it'll just get stolen and re-posted all over the net and the person who did the work will get little in return for his or her efforts. There are many days where I think that the internet's positives don't remotely outweigh its negatives. It's a major reason why so many things are negatively affecting us here as well. It's slowly but surely pushing us all back to the centralized scenario, where we can only rent software. It's funny (in a sad way) that the PC revolution was to get software out of the hands of 'evil corporations' and give it to the people. But, ultimately, the people are arguably even more morality-free because they are not under any regulatory scrutiny, allowing them to screw us all by making it harder and harder to make money actually creating something and selling it. And another big irony is that the 'making money by spying on your customers' thing, and renting out software at scale, really only works for big businesses. So the end result of the PC revolution is basically moving inexorably towards reversing the PC revolution and taking us right back where we were, only far worse now because now software is core to our way of life. Meet the new boss.
Explorans limites defectum
-
As far as I can tell the only thing the news is interested in these days is the Bachelor and MAFS. I stick to PhysOrg.
cheers Chris Maunder
Oh, God. I am still confused by the juxtaposition of the suggestion that gay marriage has made marriage meaningless, and MAFS. I saw a lot of chatter about 'teachable moments' in MAFS, but I ignored it. I still couldn't tell you who was on it. And now we have 'bachelor in paradise', there's just an endless stream of them. On the good side, have you been paying attention is nearly on again.....
-
News stopped being news long ago, when it stopped being an obligation put on TV channels in return for broadcast slots and started having to make its own money. At that point, it was all over but the lying. You can't make money taking a nuanced approach to every issue based on the specifics. You make money by polarizing people and keeping them on your side of the playing field by any means necessary. Then of course enter the internet where every wingnut on the planet can hold forth with 'the truth'. Some of those may actually believe the non-sense they spew, and many are not different from the major 'news' outlets. Not that there aren't people in the news business who I'm sure would love to do real news in the old fashioned way, and there are probably some who manage to. But that's an expensive proposition and no one wants to pay for it anymore. The internet has screwed them just like it's screwed so many people. They can work themselves to a heart attack to chase down some major story, and it'll just get stolen and re-posted all over the net and the person who did the work will get little in return for his or her efforts. There are many days where I think that the internet's positives don't remotely outweigh its negatives. It's a major reason why so many things are negatively affecting us here as well. It's slowly but surely pushing us all back to the centralized scenario, where we can only rent software. It's funny (in a sad way) that the PC revolution was to get software out of the hands of 'evil corporations' and give it to the people. But, ultimately, the people are arguably even more morality-free because they are not under any regulatory scrutiny, allowing them to screw us all by making it harder and harder to make money actually creating something and selling it. And another big irony is that the 'making money by spying on your customers' thing, and renting out software at scale, really only works for big businesses. So the end result of the PC revolution is basically moving inexorably towards reversing the PC revolution and taking us right back where we were, only far worse now because now software is core to our way of life. Meet the new boss.
Explorans limites defectum
See, I thought news has always been basically a form of entertainment, it's just become more partisan. I do agree with your fundamental proposition. I pay for The Guardian because the content is always free, and they use the money to do in depth journalism. I support the ABC for the same reason, if my taxes don't pay for it, the free market sure won't, any more.
-
Mostly old-school: 1. Local paper delivered every morning. 2. Sunday New York Times (also delivered). 3. Twitter 'Trends for you'.
The paper here is awful. I read The Guardian online. The local paper has a subscription model now, and I respect their right to try to stay profitable, but they publish nothing I'd be willing to pay to read....
-
News stopped being news long ago, when it stopped being an obligation put on TV channels in return for broadcast slots and started having to make its own money. At that point, it was all over but the lying. You can't make money taking a nuanced approach to every issue based on the specifics. You make money by polarizing people and keeping them on your side of the playing field by any means necessary. Then of course enter the internet where every wingnut on the planet can hold forth with 'the truth'. Some of those may actually believe the non-sense they spew, and many are not different from the major 'news' outlets. Not that there aren't people in the news business who I'm sure would love to do real news in the old fashioned way, and there are probably some who manage to. But that's an expensive proposition and no one wants to pay for it anymore. The internet has screwed them just like it's screwed so many people. They can work themselves to a heart attack to chase down some major story, and it'll just get stolen and re-posted all over the net and the person who did the work will get little in return for his or her efforts. There are many days where I think that the internet's positives don't remotely outweigh its negatives. It's a major reason why so many things are negatively affecting us here as well. It's slowly but surely pushing us all back to the centralized scenario, where we can only rent software. It's funny (in a sad way) that the PC revolution was to get software out of the hands of 'evil corporations' and give it to the people. But, ultimately, the people are arguably even more morality-free because they are not under any regulatory scrutiny, allowing them to screw us all by making it harder and harder to make money actually creating something and selling it. And another big irony is that the 'making money by spying on your customers' thing, and renting out software at scale, really only works for big businesses. So the end result of the PC revolution is basically moving inexorably towards reversing the PC revolution and taking us right back where we were, only far worse now because now software is core to our way of life. Meet the new boss.
Explorans limites defectum
Dean Roddey wrote:
And another big irony is that the 'making money by spying on your customers' thing, and renting out software at scale, really only works for big businesses. So the end result of the PC revolution is basically moving inexorably towards reversing the PC revolution and taking us right back where we were, only far worse now because now software is core to our way of life.
yeah, but it's always been like that. ISP's died when Telco's destroyed them, small PC shops died when department stores and On-Line giants killed them. But that's everything: Corner grocery/produce shops died when giant supermarkets killed them, ... how many actual car/motobike companies are there now (not brands, actual owners), how many fast food companies are there now, coffee shops, travel agencies, tailors, pharma, farming, groceries, manufacturing... market competition is not about being the best, fairest or even cheapest; it's outright war.
-
Dean Roddey wrote:
And another big irony is that the 'making money by spying on your customers' thing, and renting out software at scale, really only works for big businesses. So the end result of the PC revolution is basically moving inexorably towards reversing the PC revolution and taking us right back where we were, only far worse now because now software is core to our way of life.
yeah, but it's always been like that. ISP's died when Telco's destroyed them, small PC shops died when department stores and On-Line giants killed them. But that's everything: Corner grocery/produce shops died when giant supermarkets killed them, ... how many actual car/motobike companies are there now (not brands, actual owners), how many fast food companies are there now, coffee shops, travel agencies, tailors, pharma, farming, groceries, manufacturing... market competition is not about being the best, fairest or even cheapest; it's outright war.
The internet has basically broken everything.
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
None of the above.
-
Oh, God. I am still confused by the juxtaposition of the suggestion that gay marriage has made marriage meaningless, and MAFS. I saw a lot of chatter about 'teachable moments' in MAFS, but I ignored it. I still couldn't tell you who was on it. And now we have 'bachelor in paradise', there's just an endless stream of them. On the good side, have you been paying attention is nearly on again.....
Christian Graus wrote:
have you been paying attention is nearly on again
I didn't notice. I probably wasn't paying attention...
cheers Chris Maunder
-
The paper here is awful. I read The Guardian online. The local paper has a subscription model now, and I respect their right to try to stay profitable, but they publish nothing I'd be willing to pay to read....
Most local papers are really not that good (mine included). I think of my subscription as a donation trying to save an endangered species. They are most likely doomed, but it's a worthy cause nevertheless.
-
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
This borders on soapbox material, but here we go... Where you get your news depends pretty much entirely on your political bent. Mainstream news wants to be the first to report, and is willing to make stuff up (or intentionally omit facts) to further their political handlers' agendas. People (like you and me) only hear what they want to hear. Nothing will change that. Civil discourse is dead because everything is an insult or somehow offensive now. Political correctness has destroyed civilization.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
So society has basically burned to the ground since I posted here regularly. One thing I see a lot is older people sure they know 'the truth' based on something they saw on YouTube. Certainly news sources seem a lot more partisan to me than they used to be and it's hard to find unbiased news as opposed to seeking out world events filtered through either side of politics. So, where do you get your news? Or are you just hiding under a rock waiting for the storm to pass?
When I was in college I got my news and opinion from a number of sources. Shortwave - BBC world service, Radio Moscow, & Radio Havana Cuba. On my job as a delivery driver - Rush Limbaugh - a well known conservative talk radio host. At home on weekends our National Public Radio Weekend edition. On Sunday I bought the paper on my way home from church and would read it front to back all afternoon. That was in the early 90's. Some years later I lived and worked in Ukraine. For the first time since I was a teenager I had a working television. The American NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw was broadcast in the morning in English without voice over. I only watched a few episodes because I was usually on the job when it was on. I found this news show to be very slick and somewhat entertaining but also lacking in news. They would wrap up the broadcast with a "look around the world segment" typically there would be a cool graphic globe spinning and the viewer would zoom in as the globe slowed and finally settled on some place in middle America. Cut to reporter in Centerville Nebraska who would do a piece on farmer Joe getting recognized by Guinness for growing the largest ever pumpkin squash. As I became more proficient in Russian I would watch the nightly news on ORT (first channel). The news reader would talk extensively about Russian participation in this or that world economic forum. Or some trade or military deal with these African countries. I got the impression that the average Russian got a clearer view of world affairs than the average American, a decidedly Russian biased view of course. Back in the states in the late 90's I learned that in order to better understand what was going on at home and abroad one had to bypass the regular news and go to the sources. Industry trade publications and financial publications. I could get an idea not only of what was going on in the world but often the why.