Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Obviously, you set the bar MUCH lower than I.  I mean, do you REALLY think an article on the possible right-wing supreme court nominees that would come from a McCain victory is remotely surprising or even interesting?  Do you really think the conditions at Walter Reed were surprising or especially relevant to our foreign policy.  Don't you think that article on the food crises in Egypt was a BIT patronizing. Etc. Etc.

There is a reason why the more someone reads the Post, the more ignorant he becomes.  It is just horseshit "journalism."  But go ahead--pretend that reading the Post is a legitimate way to become "informed."  

And I will stick to my conclusion that the main reason a guy like Jim Hansen at NASA can be absolutely ignored on climate change for 20 YEARS is because folks think that a story about mold at Walter Reed is "serious".

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Sun Jun 29th, 2008 at 02:36:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I mean, do you REALLY think an article on the possible right-wing supreme court nominees that would come from a McCain victory is remotely surprising or even interesting?

I'm sorry, I thought the criteria was "remotely serious," not "surprising" or "interesting."  But for the record, yes, I do think the rightward shift of the Supreme Court is extremely interesting.  And important.  And serious.  And if a paper were to not talk about how the election might affect the Supreme Court, it would be supremely irresponsible.

Do you really think the conditions at Walter Reed were surprising or especially relevant to our foreign policy.

Again, make up your mind -- do you want "remotely serious," or do you want "surprising"?  And while I'm not ceding the point that Walter Reed is irrelevant to foreign policy (um, how do you think those soldiers get there?) does everything "serious" or "surprising" need to be "relevant to our foreign policy"?  Because then I guess we can forget about the health care system and the schools.

Don't you think that article on the food crises in Egypt was a BIT patronizing.

Uh, no.  But I'm curious why you think it was.  Please do elaborate.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Sun Jun 29th, 2008 at 02:56:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A story about right-wing supreme court nominees is about as serious as a story about the coming of dawn.

We are on the verge of making the planet uninhabitable for human life.  We are coming to the end of the age of petroleum.  And trees should die to tell us that a right-wing president would appoint right-wing supreme court justices?  Oh. My. Gawd!

I ran into the smartest guy I have ever known at a wedding in January.  Even at 90, he still has most of his MANY marbles.  He says to me, "There is one subject that is so important that it should be headlined with 144 point type, above the fold, in every paper in the land, every day."  I said, "I hope you are talking about climate change because I cannot think of anything else that is that important."  He just smiles and says, "Well I'm glad someone gets it."

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Sun Jun 29th, 2008 at 03:40:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We are on the verge of making the planet uninhabitable for human life.  We are coming to the end of the age of petroleum.  And trees should die to tell us that a right-wing president would appoint right-wing supreme court justices?  Oh. My. Gawd!

OK, first, if that's all you think the article said, you didn't read it very closely.  Or at all.

But I think the core of the issue is something else -- it seems that anything that isn't about climate change is by your definition "not serious" and thus unworthy of publication.  I'll grant you that the Post doesn't cover climate change well enough, or often enough (a criticism that could fairly be leveled at almost any newspaper on the planet), but there are other things to talk about that are no-less-legitimate subjects for reporting or debate.

Oh, and I'm still waiting to have you explain how that Egypt article is patronizing.  And to whom.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Sun Jun 29th, 2008 at 05:25:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Once we had 20 YEARS to do something about climate change.  And if we had gotten busy then, we would by now into "third generation" efforts to solve the problem.  But no.  We have done absolutely NOTHING about the problem except make it worse.

How did that happen?  Well, one thing that happened was that the Post, in its "wisdom," thought that climate change wasn't about science but was just another political story.  So instead of doing something useful, we are trapped by their James-Inhofe-just-might-have-a-point mindset.

We are talking about criminal levels of irresponsibility here.

Now YOU may think the Post is a pretty good paper.  I am certain the publishers thank you for your patronage--goodness knows, their readership is slipping by the day.  But try getting out and reading papers from the rest of the world and you will certainly discover that the Post is barely above My Weekly Reader in seriousness and content.

And BTW, if you cannot figure out why the article on Egypt is patronizing for yourself, try not traveling outside USA until you do.  You are an international incident just waiting to happen.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
_ But try getting out and reading papers from the rest of the world and you will certainly discover that the Post is barely above My Weekly Reader in seriousness and content.

And BTW, if you cannot figure out why the article on Egypt is patronizing for yourself, try not traveling outside USA until you do.  You are an international incident just waiting to happen._

Try reading the European Tribune so that you won't be a blog incident waiting to happen.

by MarekNYC on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:29:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Marek, I'm going to buy you dinner the next time I'm in the States.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:42:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
mmhm, dinner.
by MarekNYC on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:57:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
techno, do you realize tsp actually lives in Cairo?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:42:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No!

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"
by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 01:57:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes! And she can read the local press in Arabic, too!

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 02:06:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Then WHY is she defending the freaking Post?????

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"
by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 02:18:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
On occasion the papers still do put out good work. As a whole, though, if they are your only source of information they will only help you cultivate a worldview that is inaccurate.

In terms of criminal neglect with regard to climate change - I'm not convinced a smooth transition was ever in the cards, and I'm not talking about the newspapers, I'm talking about us as a species.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 02:26:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes!!!  This is EASILY the biggest problem to face the human race.  NO ONE is saying it will be easy.

But it would have at least HAPPENED if the Post took climate change as seriously as a presidential blow job.  Or if they had been so damn busy lying us into an invasion of IRAQ!

Let's be serious here.  We can argue about my name calling--or we can demand that our papers get better.  What REALLY annoys me about the Post is that the personalities act exactly the way kids did when I was in 7th grade.  I'm sorry.  We simply CANNOT meaningfully address the most serious problem of the species if our communication is in the hands of people who giggle about blow jobs.

What is so sad is how many here still want to defend these people.  What?! Pray tell? will it take to make you angry with professional liars? who wouldn't know a serious story if it came up and kicked them in the groin?  And how do we know the last is true--check out the Post coverage on climate change.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 04:22:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What is so sad is how many here still want to defend these people.

We all vary in our thoughts on what an ideal world we want to live in looks like and how much of ourselves we want to invest to achieve that ideal. This is what you are arguing over with stormy.

I don't know stormy's views, but the reason I'm not outraged over the poor state of journalism is that I will be neither happy nor upset if humanity goes extinct, and I also decided a few years ago that if my life goal is to be happy, which it is, activism and such can only play a small part of that path. I will not grind myself down or get myself thrown in jail in order to help forge some sort of longer term stability for humanity. Nor will I apologize for this decision. I would like, and likely will, be working in the alternative energy industry soon. That's as far as I'll go.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 06:24:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because those of us who read the major papers realize that there's a lot of good reporting among all the drek. Those of us who read the blogs closely realize how much of the important stuff comes from that reporting. And speaking as someone who reads the foreign press of several countries religiously, I have to say that while the ratio of ideological crap to good reporting isn't as bad in some of them (though worse in others), in absolute terms the big US papers of record do more useful reporting - a question of resources I imagine.
by MarekNYC on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 02:30:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Really?  The Washington Post is better at WHAT than Asia Time or Deutche Welle?

And at least those folks were lying us into the disaster that is Iraq.  For THAT, there is NO forgiveness.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 04:24:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Asia Times has its own ideological crap of a rather different variety among its good reporting. I never look at Deutsche Welle, I do, however, read the main German papers. Spend some time regularly reading FAZ, Die Welt, or Die Zeit and get back to me.
by MarekNYC on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 06:38:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well I'm biased towards Asia Times because they always publish my stuff, which may be crap, but there's no ideology in it....

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 07:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But don't take Die Zeit too seriously when it comes to U.S. politics. I caught them peddling the "Gore invented the internet" long after the better U.S. papers had finally given up on it, and that wasn't an isolated case. Concerning German politics, or other things closer to home, they are, indeed, much better than the equivalent U.S. papers on their local politics.
by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Tue Jul 1st, 2008 at 03:54:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
is increasingly loony, at least on the geopolitical pieces it publishes on Russia, China and oil&gas.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 11:15:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe you could say why you find that article patronizing.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 02:43:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because I refuse to let this post get on that topic.  You want to write about it?  Fine.  Just keep me out of it.

All I know is that I had a roommate in college from Bangladesh.  He was VERY sensitive to slights--real or imagined.  So I read "third-world" coverage through his eyes.  I only read four paragraphs of that piece and decided it was just another Ugly American Special that Shamsul would NOT have liked.

Here endeth my conversation on this subject.

The topic here is whether the Post can effectively cover serious subjects.  I say they cannot because they do not.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 04:31:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The topic here is whether the Post can effectively cover serious subjects.  I say they cannot because they do not.

... a theory that has obviously been thoroughly tested by the reading of four whole paragraphs.

Honestly, I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but you might want to quit while you're only a little behind.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 04:39:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am 58 years old.  I read over 3500 books and 200,000 article before I stopped counting five years ago.

I think I am quite capable of judging a newspaper story by the first four paragraphs.  It is how they are designed to be read.

But hey, if you think the Post is a serious source of information, ignore me.  Read it with passion.  I just want better information.  And I know we are all going to die if we don't get serious about real problems.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 04:58:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
ignore me

Oh, fear not.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 05:00:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I find the way American journalists are trained to open their stories annoying, too, but that doesn't make the rest of the piece uninformative.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 at 05:36:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sorry techno, in my perspective, you completely lose the argument right here as you were the one who initially brought up the claim that the article was patronizing. This is relevant in your argument why the Post is no longer newsworthy on serious subject. Ignoring it because it becomes inconvenient is not a good strategy, especially when you even refuse to read further than 4 paragraphs.

A discussion on a tangent can serve as important example to flesh out your core argument.

Hell, I know I'm a poor judge on sensitivities, but living in a third world country does open up one's eyes. The anecdotal leaders in western press on describing "foreign" scenes are getting rather tiresome IMNSHO, but they generally serve as appetizer for an underlying point. It's the point that matters, not the anecdote, however patronizing that anecdote may feel to you.

by Nomad (Bjinse) on Tue Jul 1st, 2008 at 06:47:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, and...

Obviously, you set the bar MUCH lower than I.

Yes.  Widely known for my low standards, thanks.  Have a nice day.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Sun Jun 29th, 2008 at 02:57:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series