user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Option B is worse
In my opinion B is worse because you're distorting the facts and preventing the viewer from drawing their own conclusions.People can always dismiss the political commentary that an anchor spews as rhetoric and still make up their own mind but when the facts are fabrication there is no way for a person to honestly decide for themselves.
Voted : Option B is worse
.
by MO_ on Sun Aug 13, 06 11:29am
[+]
lol Herzog, hmmm, let me think... Its a toughy thats for sure!
Voted : Option B is worse
I would choose Option C (we get the point already now stop spamming ballots with the same point), but Option B is worse.
Spamming? I checked the newest ballot page and a grande total of two ballots appeared on this subject. One involving a specific news story, the other a general case. Not the same question at all.
But if you believe that a whopping 6% of the ballots being about media corruption (which some deem an important subject) constitues spam, and that this prevents you from reading about how much Bush is like hitler, or the 911 conspiracy theory de jour, then by all means avoid commenting on my ballots.
And obviously people don't get it yet because this is a major deal and yet there has been at best apathy, more commonly active defense of their actions and outrage at other for pointing out the medias lies.
So no, you don't get the point.
Sorry, both are bad.
^ granted, we should demand higher standards from our media and neither is acceptable. But I don't think they're both equally bad.
Like if you're given a choice of being kicked in leg or the face, neither is desirable, but since you're stuck with one or the other you might as well go with the lesser of two evils.
You're right about there only being 2 other ballots beside this one (thought there were more O.o). However, three ballots, while not necesarily on the same subject, trying to get the same point across (that people will let Reuters slide while they constantly criticise FOX News) is spamming IMO. Just like Jinn's ballots (I think I remember three, but you've already shown that I'm not much one for remembering stuff :P) about non-violent civil rights leaders. Not on the same subject. Yet their point was to get people to believe that Islam is a religion of war. Your ballots, while they do show that Reuters can be and is as biased as FOX, show that Reuters can be and is as biased as FOX three times, which (to me at least) gets annoying.
I wasn't getting "outraged at others for pointing out the media's lies," I was just saying that I get the point...
And I've never said that Bush is comparable to Hitler, nor do I believe 9/11 was orchestrated by the US government. I was merely pointing out that I thought you were spamming... I never said I disagreed with you; you were the one who took it like that.
You're totally right Himself. They're the same ballots just worded differntly. Anyone with an iota of common sense can see that. Its annoying as all hell
No, they are not the same ballot.
Each was a completely different story, posted as it came out.
If you'd like to stop seeing them then pray for Reuters and other news agencies to stop lying. Or just stick your heads back in the sand and ignore the ballots.
We've had how many hundreds of ballots about the war in Iraq? And yet those are not all protested for being the same.
I think the problem is more that people don't want to read what I'm typing. And I can understand that, the fact that the media is completely fabricating the news out of thin air is somewhat disturbing, I could see why some would rather not deal with that reality.
And this ballot has to do with the sad fact that despite all the lies from the media that have been exposed lately, only foxnews is singled out as being biased on here.
And as we all know, foxnews has never fabricated a story as have most of the other, leftleaning stations.
Of course if they get one detail wrong in the near future I can promise you that this string of ballots will be nothing compared to the righteous outrage that will be splashed across B&W for the next few months.
I recognized that each of your ballots were on different subjects, but they all seem to have the common thread of "Reuters is being excused for outright lieing while FOX News is being pummeled for conservative bias." That common thread is what makes it annoying; you've already proven that Reuters is just as biased as people say FOX is, so, unless you have found proof of other news orgs that embelish/stage photos, your new ballots aren't doing much except hitting in home. Hard.
I wasn't here during the war in Iraq, so I can't say anything about that, but on the "Enough is enough" ballot, I voted that there were too many ballots on the war between Israel and Hezbollah (even though I made one myself [smile:neutral). So I'm not trying to single your ballots out.
And you're right when you say that I don't what to read what you're typing, because I used to trust Reuters more than I did FOX News. Do I get the point now?
Okay realx. They are the same ballots because theyre the same topics. If you get new news then post it in the original ballot. You're just creating new ones on the same issue. I read one of your others and I see your point but I also think you're trying to say they are intentionally doing this. I don't think they are. Reading your take on it there is some grand conspiracy at work. talk to somone in the news business and they can explain to you how it works in purchasing news photos. Like did you know that freelance photogs take pictures in war zones and then sell them and that includes the description. Did you give any thought that its the independent photographers that are taking so many pictures they lose track of the accurate caption? war zones are hell on earth, aren't they?
I also cant tell if you're saying all news is biased or not? If you are then you have to accept and admit that Fox news too is biased. Im just not fully getting where your head is at on all these same ballots.
Voted : Option B is worse
Without a doubt.
Voted : Option B is worse
They're both abhorrent but I must say option b is a few degrees worse.
I don't know exactly how to answer, because fabricating evidence of stories goes far beyond bias.
Interesting ... I hope you are not going to tell us that there is much 'Option A' out there.
herzog ... I think you need professional help; these events seem to have really unhinged you. It's amusing that you have no trouble with mass deatha nd destruction, but have kittens when smoke is added to a photograph.
And before you go off on yet another wrong tangent -- no, I am not condoning fabrication. Merely taken aback by your priorities.
Here is some of your 'reporting the facts' journamalism ...
Friday on CNN Headline News, anchor Chuck Roberts spoke with Hotline senior editor John Mercurio regarding Thurdsday's revelations of a foiled terror plot in Britain. Said Roberts, "How does this factor into the Lieberman/ Lamont contest? And might some argue, as some have, that Lamont is the al Qaeda candidate?"
Yup ... all 'news.'
And no, that wasn't aired during any 'commentary' segment ... it was on the 'news.'
Here's the difference, herzog ...
I condemn both actions.
You condemn only what is politically convenient.
So do forgive me if I don't share your selective sense of outrage.
Lol, cath, you don't seem to have much outrage at this at all.
Just pretend they were routinely fabricating evidence to make Israel look better/hezbollah worse, then really let 'em have it.
And yes, I do consider presenting false evidence as fact on a routine basis to be worthy of concern. Why do you not?
|
|
