Opinions on the "quality" of journalistic reporting

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A couple of questions I thought I'd pose to a wider audience resulting from something that surfaced in another thread.

Can a person claim an authoritative opinion on say, a movie or a piece of journalistic reporting without actually having watched the material that they are commenting on?

[kaydee457 13]

Well, we're getting the the "real" you, aren't we?

Adolecent to say the least.....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Unfortunately the thing with immaturity is that its less justifiable the older you get. You have a lot of years on me, my friend, as you're so fond of telling me.

I'm sure I can expect a retort as ridiculous and irrelevant as that last one. Do me a favour though - at least wait a few minutes until the smell of old fart has cleared

[kaydee457 13]

A couple of questions I thought I'd pose to a wider audience resulting from something that surfaced in another thread.

Can a person claim an authoritative opinion on say, a movie or a piece of journalistic reporting without actually having watched the material that they are commenting on?

Well, just one more thing.

The real question is this;

Should/ can anyone base an opinion based on a video who's content, and context was cleary evident to be propaganda in nature (similar to the beheadings of U.S. citizens and in this case the assination of a U.S. soldier filmed for purposes of distribution to the media), and as viewed and subsequently evaluated by other news media orgaizations and thereby universally condemned ny those news media organizations as inappropriate to air, but then subsequently aired by one rouge major news oraganization, CNN?

Can one deduce from the other news sources that the media was inappropriate, without ever having actually seen it?

That's the REAL question that ekerose fails to articulate.........

Edited November 20, 2006 by kaydee457

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, just one more thing.

The real question is this;

Should/ can anyone base an opinion based on a video who's content, and context was cleary evident to be propaganda in nature (similar to the beheadings of U.S. citizens and in this case the assination of a U.S. soldier filmed for purposes of distribution to the media), and as viwed and evaluated by other news media orgaizations was universally condemned as inappropriate to air, but then subsequently aired by one major news oraganization, CNN?

Can one deduce from the other news sources that the media was inappropriate, without ever having actually seen it?

Sounds great but not having seen it how would you know?

How's about I tell you, as I did before (having seen the report) that the video (which makes up 20% of the CNN report) is not the main problem with the reporting. You would actually have to watch the report to refute the argument, wouldn't you? But now its become a point of pride for you - I'm sure you can do a great job of refuting it without that.

I'm sure you can tell me what you object to about the reporters method without actually knowing what he said.

[kaydee457 13]

Well, just one more thing.

The real question is this;

Should/ can anyone base an opinion based on a video who's content, and context was cleary evident to be propaganda in nature (similar to the beheadings of U.S. citizens and in this case the assination of a U.S. soldier filmed for purposes of distribution to the media), and as viwed and evaluated by other news media orgaizations was universally condemned as inappropriate to air, but then subsequently aired by one major news oraganization, CNN?

Can one deduce from the other news sources that the media was inappropriate, without ever having actually seen it?

Sounds great but not having seen it how would you know?

How's about I tell you, as I did before (having seen the report) that the video (which makes up 20% of the CNN report) is not the main problem with the reporting. You would actually have to watch the report to refute the argument, wouldn't you? But now its become a point of pride for you - I'm sure you can do a great job of refuting it without that.

I'm sure you can tell me what you object to about the reporters method without actually knowing what he said.

erekose. Let's go back to kindergarten once again with you.

How do you know the holocaust was real, and not made up? Did you witness it, personally? Is it real? Do you have an opinion about it, given that you witnessed it personally? Oh, perhaps you did not. We'd still like to hear youre opinion though....

Your whole argument is absurd. People read and take in information all the time from trusted sources on a daily basis in our lives and come to conclusions, and form opinions, and make choices based on hat information.

Grow up, sister... You are clearly obsessing over these issues.

If you think otherwise then you clearly wear a tin foil hat......

Edited November 20, 2006 by kaydee457

[PurrSuede 0]

Well, we're getting the the "real" you, aren't we?

Adolecent to say the least.....

Pot. Kettle.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, just one more thing.

The real question is this;

Should/ can anyone base an opinion based on a video who's content, and context was cleary evident to be propaganda in nature (similar to the beheadings of U.S. citizens and in this case the assination of a U.S. soldier filmed for purposes of distribution to the media), and as viwed and evaluated by other news media orgaizations was universally condemned as inappropriate to air, but then subsequently aired by one major news oraganization, CNN?

Can one deduce from the other news sources that the media was inappropriate, without ever having actually seen it?

Sounds great but not having seen it how would you know?

How's about I tell you, as I did before (having seen the report) that the video (which makes up 20% of the CNN report) is not the main problem with the reporting. You would actually have to watch the report to refute the argument, wouldn't you? But now its become a point of pride for you - I'm sure you can do a great job of refuting it without that.

I'm sure you can tell me what you object to about the reporters method without actually knowing what he said.

erekose. Let's go back to kindergarten once again with you.

How do you know the holocuast wa real? Did you witness it? Is it real? Do you have an opinion about oit, given that you did not witness it personally?

Your whole argument is absurd. People read and take in information all the time from trusted sources on a daily basis in our lives and come to conclusions, and form opinions, and make choices based on hat information.

Grow up, sister... You are clearly obsessing over these issues.

If you think otherwise then you clearly wear a tin foil hat......

Back so soon - "I Love Lucy" must have gotten boring eh?

Even if I hadn't visited Auschwitz, even if I hadn't taken several history college courses (and worked briefly as a journalist) if I choose to deny the holocaust I would be buried under documentary evidence. In fact, now that you point it out - the only way that people do deny the Holocaust is because they deliberately choose not to seek out the evidence. Hence Holocaust denial is rooted in ignorance.

We're talking about a single news story - that you didn't watch, but felt compelled to rubbish the story, the reporter and the network on the a video you didn't watch, and the other 80% of the reporters commentary (that you didn't watch either). It doesn't require a lot of study, or even a lot of effort - merely a 5 minute investment of time and an open mind.

As I said, the video is not the problem with the report. If you care to refute that then please go ahead. I'm waiting to see if you can actually address the issue, or continuing with that infamous two-step you accuse everyone else of.

Edited November 20, 2006 by erekose

[PurrSuede 0]

Your whole argument is absurd.

Pot. Kettle.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You're being outvoted Kaydee. I guess you know better - having "worldly experience" and all.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You are doing well, young Jedi.

[PurrSuede 0]

You're being outvoted Kaydee.

Just like the rest of America did last election Day compared to the kind of opinions he offers here...

Outvoted, outmoded, incoherent, and not of interest (or rationality) to the MAJORITY of Americans...

[kaydee457 13]

You're being outvoted Kaydee. I guess you know better - having "worldly experience" and all.

Yes, most the usual "bunch" that vote which ever the "wind blows"....You know, like you. Whatever's fashionable at the time......

Nevertheless, the "vote" doesn't diminish the fact that you're inexperienced and void of any practical knowledge regarding any of the threads that you participate in...

[Cristy 4]

kaydee with your vast knowledge of the world why are you wasting your brilliant mind on an internet message board? Why are you not passing on the knowledge in a more meaningful way? Professor? Politician? Heck even President?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You're being outvoted Kaydee. I guess you know better - having "worldly experience" and all.

Yes, most the usual "bunch" that vote which ever the "wind blows"....You know, like you. Whatever's fashionable at the time......

Nevertheless, the "vote" doesn't diminish the fact that you're inexperienced and void of any practical knowledge regarding any of the threads that you participate in...

Is that a "Meh!" post?

Again if you care to refute my interpretation of the CNN report, please do so - if you think you can without actually watching it. Talk about building your house on sand.

Someone likes Torpark I think