UK National Children's Bureau labels toddlers "racist" for refusing unfamiliar foreign foods

[Marilyn. 340]

at first I was like what the heck .. calling a kid a racist because he says yuk to food.. but after I read the rest of the article I realize they are talking about more then food... like if a kid starts name calling etc....

[Steve Y Jessica 1]

Well we're talking child psychology here - psychology in general has never really been about quantitative data collection and analysis, not exclusively at any rate.

I get the reasoning behind the article - perhaps more than you do, as I didn't buy into the outrage angle the way that you did.

I tend to think that people can talk about a newspaper story without being suckered into the writer's emotional hook. But therein lies the irony - because if this reporter wrote the story without that "hook", he would have no story to write, for the simple reason that the "outrage" is what makes the story.

And I haven't bought into anything. I started out by making a joke. Most news stories you have to take with a grain of salt. This was probably some small piece about the food, and the reporter turnned it into a bigger deal than it is. Or, agreed, he would not have a story.

He did the same thing that me and you are doing now. Purposely making a bigger deal out of something to try to get under the other persons skin.

But it does make things more fun and my time here at work more interesting.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

[Steve Y Jessica 1]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

It just shows that none of us have anything better to do!!!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bringing Global warming into this is a bit of a stretch

All I'm saying is that there's probably more to the thinking behind this "saying yuk" thing than the article chooses to explain, and that this lack of context is deliberate on the part of the reporter.

The global warming thing was just an example of two different sides using the same data to come up with two opposite answers.

Also, as in this article, the reporter probably looked at this and came up with his own version of the story. And, the more that the reporter can get people to read the story and talk about it, the better for the reporter and the newspaper.

[Mags 112]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

Doubtless your info is more current than mine. I've not been in the UK for nearly 5 years - it was a fairly respectable paper back then (though with declining circulation). I guess they're trying to reverse the trend by tarting up the paper for the "mainstream". If I remember rightly going there was one broadsheet (perhaps it was the Telegraph) that published a non-broadsheet edition - because the marketing bods thought that having to ####### around folding pages over on themselves put people off reading it.

Shame its gone the way of The Times... I wonder what The Guardian is like now...

Those broadsheets aren't exactly practical for reading on the tube - as soon as you open them, you're drowning in flying inserts and unreasonably large sheets of newspaper. And you can't open them fully on the train without horning in on someone elses personal space (not that his is hard to do anyway). The newspaper equivalent of ordinance survey maps...

Edited July 7, 2008 by Number 6

[Ban Hammer 14,569]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

but the sun has page 3

[pedroh 21]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

but the sun has page 3

wordd lol

[Amby 490]

page 3 girls are usually skanky

[Mags 112]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

Doubtless your info is more current than mine. I've not been in the UK for nearly 5 years - it was a fairly respectable paper back then (though with declining circulation). I guess they're trying to reverse the trend by tarting up the paper for the "mainstream". If I remember rightly going there was one broadsheet (perhaps it was the Telegraph) that published a non-broadsheet edition - because the marketing bods thought that having to ####### around folding pages over on themselves put people off reading it.

Shame its gone the way of The Times... I wonder what The Guardian is like now...

Those broadsheets aren't exactly practical for reading on the tube - as soon as you open them, you're drowning in flying inserts and unreasonably large sheets of newspaper. And you can't open them fully on the train without horning in on someone else's personal space (not that this is hard to do anyway). The newspaper equivalent of ordinance survey maps...

Ah! It is the Guardian that has a tabloid size now, along with the broadsheet size.

[Ban Hammer 14,569]

page 3 girls are usually skanky

as long as they are showing their boobies, neither pedroh nor i will care

[Saddle Bronc 124]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

but the sun has page 3

Eh, you want a page 3--then take a trip across border into Canada. You can buy Canoe Group tabloids (all named "Sun") of various cities including Calgary, Edmonton, Pigtown (Toronto), Ottawa and Winnipeg--all of which have a page 3, exactly like the British paper (though I dunno if the connexion is more than coincidental)

(if you don't want to make the trip, there is an online SG at www.canoe.ca)

[Ban Hammer 14,569]

I agree there isn't enough to this story to justify a 2 page thread

The "#######?" in the sub-head for the thread is as sensationalist as the article.

Which is a shame as the Telegraph is usually a good paper. That's why I'm slightly miffed that they'd print something like this... its up-market tabloid material - the sort of thing that the Daily Mail would ordinarily publish...

But it does the job of getting people to click their tongues and bemoan "nanny states" and "political correctness".

On my last visit to the UK I bought the Telegraph - broadsheet Daily Mail now, imo.

but the sun has page 3

Eh, you want a page 3--then take a trip across border into Canada. You can buy Canoe Group tabloids (all named "Sun") of various cities including Calgary, Edmonton, Pigtown (Toronto), Ottawa and Winnipeg--all of which have a page 3, exactly like the British paper (though I dunno if the connexion is more than coincidental)

(if you don't want to make the trip, there is an online SG at www.canoe.ca)

oh yeah, the sunshine girl. i've seen that page before

[Steve Y Jessica 1]

page 3 girls are usually skanky

And your point is??????