It's about ignorance, intellectual laziness, failure to do even the simplest research, and the political prejudices that remain to guide the writing when reason and facts are left on the floor.
For one thing, look how effectively you have deflected the argument from whether or not the facts are true to whether or not the press can be trusted.
When most people get their critical information from the press, what on Earth makes you think these two subjects are not intimately related?
As I said, this little bit on the polar bears is just a recent and obvious example of something I have seen MANY examples of, particularly related to the warfare in Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, and Afghanistan. It isn't just about photos, either. The AP is under scrutiny right now for some news sources it's been using.
It is rarely a case of malice in those other cases, either. It is almost always someone accepting a piece of information or a picture from a vague source, and running with it not because it may or may not be accurate, but because it's too much trouble to check it out, and because it fits the agenda the writer or editor wants to project. Unfortunately for balance, most of the press seems to have a similar agenda.
Off Topic » in reply to Point taken. You are absolutely correct.
It never was about malice.
The whole thread (42 posts)
- Those poor, lost polar bears...
- Saw an article on a helicopter which was shot down.
- Things must be slow at work, TB.
- Blogs, Limbaugh, etc.
- How are the spotted owls doing?
- Beats the hell out of me.
- re: How are the spotted owls doing?
- Screw the spotted owls!
- How are the spotted owls doing?
- A clarification...
- Not really.
- Blogs, Limbaugh, etc.