Opinions on the "quality" of journalistic reporting

[KarenCee 3]

This is like saying I can teach a particular skill or introduce new material to my students without having read the material myself.

Nope. How can reporters claim authority if they haven't seen it for themselves. Is this what you're angling at?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

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?

This is different than the poll question. Which is the question you want to ask?

1. commenting authoritatively on journalism without reading/viewing the journalism

2. commenting authoritatively on journalism without seeing the original material that was commented on

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

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?

This is different than the poll question. Which is the question you want to ask?

1. commenting authoritatively on journalism without reading/viewing the journalism

2. commenting authoritatively on journalism without seeing the original material that was commented on

In a nutshell - see bolded part.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

[kaydee457 13]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Some of you are confused by the way the question is composed because she wishes to skew the results of the POLL in her favor.

The specific circumstance is where I posted an article here on VJ that was critical of CNN's decision to air a video clip that was clearly produced and composed to be used as propaganda.

The clip was described (both in written media as well as verbally during a discussion on TV) as two terrorists poised to kill an American soldier while he was perched in his turret atop his armored vehicle. The two terrorists were filming the assassination clearly with the intent to distribute the clip showing an American being killed.

Her contention (erekose) is that since *I* personally had not seen the video then *I* have no substantive input as to its appropriateness.

Further, her contention is that I shall not have an opinion regarding this circumstance because I had not viewed it directly. My contention is that of course I can and I do have an opinion!

I've never seen any of the video clips of the beheadings of Berg or the others either but I certainly know it would be inappropriate and irresponsible of any U.S. based news organization to air them on TV. Clearly this has something to do with ethical behavior.

I relied on the facts presented in the article as well as a written consensus of other major media organizations that chose not to air the video as its context and purpose was clear.

erekose clearly doesn't get it......

Prop-a gan-da........

Edited November 20, 2006 by kaydee457

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

erekose is a guy.........

[kaydee457 13]

erekose is a guy.........

Obviously fooled me...... Somewhere along the line I thought someone refrred to this person as "her".....

My mistake- I apologize...

Edited November 20, 2006 by kaydee457

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

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Some of you are confused by the way the question is composed because she wishes to skew the results of the POLL in her favor.

The specific circumstance is where I posted an article here on VJ that was critical of CNN's decision to air a video clip that was clearly produced and composed to be used as propaganda.

The clip was described (both in written media as well as verbally during a discussion on TV) as two terrorists poised to kill an American soldier while he was perched in his turret atop his armored vehicle. The two terrorists were filming the assassination clearly with the intent to distribute the clip showing an American being killed.

Her contention (erekose) is that since *I* personally had not seen the video then *I* have no substantive input as to its appropriateness.

Further, her contention is that I shall not have an opinion regarding this circumstance because I had not viewed it directly. My contention is that of course I can and I do have an opinion!

I've never seen any of the video clips of the beheadings of Berg or the others either but I certainly know it would be inappropriate and irresponsible of any U.S. based news organization to air them on TV. Clearly this has something to do with ethical behavior.

I relied on the facts presented in the article as well as a written consensus of other major media organizations that chose not to air the video as its context and purpose was clear.

erekose clearly doesn't get it......

Prop-a gan-da........

Thanks for clearing that up. I don't need to see a beheading video to have an opinion. At least you have an opinion. erekose never seems to have one.

erekose, what say you?

[kaydee457 13]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

No not flip-flopping. I, like you and all the rest of society rely on others we trust as sources of substantive and authoratative information.

Yes, I have been "there" and continue to go "there" and so when the topic of "there" comes up in these forums I do not rely on the likes of you and erekose as an "authoratative" source.

my thoughts to you and he is to get some first hand experience and then you'll gain some perspective....

Hardly pompous......

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

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

No not flip-flopping. I, like you and all the rest of society rely on others we trust as sources of substantive and authoratative information.

Yes, I have been "there" and continue to go "there" and so when the topic of "there" comes up in these forums I do not rely on the likes of you and erekose as an "authoratative" source.

my thoughts to you and he is to get some first hand experience and then you'll gain some perspective....

Hardly pompous......

I don't dispute that someone who has been 'there' has an insight and perspecitve they can add to a discussion, but you regularly use it as a trump card to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. As you just pointed out, we all can have an informed opinion about an issue based on another person's point of view without being a firsthand witness. You do it all the time. Unless your omni-present, there's no way that you see all and experience all that you formed your opinion about.

[kaydee457 13]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

No not flip-flopping. I, like you and all the rest of society rely on others we trust as sources of substantive and authoratative information.

Yes, I have been "there" and continue to go "there" and so when the topic of "there" comes up in these forums I do not rely on the likes of you and erekose as an "authoratative" source.

my thoughts to you and he is to get some first hand experience and then you'll gain some perspective....

Hardly pompous......

I don't dispute that someone who has been 'there' has an insight and perspecitve they can add to a discussion, but you regularly use it as a trump card to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. As you just pointed out, we all can have an informed opinion about an issue based on another person's point of view without being a firsthand witness. You do it all the time. Unless your omni-present, there's no way that you see all and experience all that you formed your opinion about.

Yes i do do that. So what? Are your feelings hurt?

[Carol&Marc 0]

I think this poll has been violated with Personal messages it was trending the opposite way??? Im calling my lawyer! Sound familiar

Edited November 20, 2006 by Carol&Marc

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

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

No not flip-flopping. I, like you and all the rest of society rely on others we trust as sources of substantive and authoratative information.

Yes, I have been "there" and continue to go "there" and so when the topic of "there" comes up in these forums I do not rely on the likes of you and erekose as an "authoratative" source.

my thoughts to you and he is to get some first hand experience and then you'll gain some perspective....

Hardly pompous......

I don't dispute that someone who has been 'there' has an insight and perspecitve they can add to a discussion, but you regularly use it as a trump card to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. As you just pointed out, we all can have an informed opinion about an issue based on another person's point of view without being a firsthand witness. You do it all the time. Unless your omni-present, there's no way that you see all and experience all that you formed your opinion about.

Yes i do do that. So what? Are your feelings hurt?

No, but a little intellectual honesty would go a long way towards credibility in your arguments.

[kaydee457 13]

Thanks. People can read the material or not. But don't expect to be taken seriously when people find out you didn't.

What erekose is attempting to do is to diminish my credibility in another thread because in her world one must have direct experience before forming an opinion, and then subsequently airing it.

Wait...aren't you the guy who keeps on pompously stating your authority on foreign military issues because 'you've been there'? You're flip flopping to what definition most suits you.

No not flip-flopping. I, like you and all the rest of society rely on others we trust as sources of substantive and authoratative information.

Yes, I have been "there" and continue to go "there" and so when the topic of "there" comes up in these forums I do not rely on the likes of you and erekose as an "authoratative" source.

my thoughts to you and he is to get some first hand experience and then you'll gain some perspective....

Hardly pompous......

I don't dispute that someone who has been 'there' has an insight and perspecitve they can add to a discussion, but you regularly use it as a trump card to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. As you just pointed out, we all can have an informed opinion about an issue based on another person's point of view without being a firsthand witness. You do it all the time. Unless your omni-present, there's no way that you see all and experience all that you formed your opinion about.

Yes i do do that. So what? Are your feelings hurt?

No, but a little intellectual honesty would go a long way towards credibility in your arguments.

Don't get your point. I'll let you have the last word........