![]() |
Come on, Biden
I understand you're trying to be the left-leaning centrist, but this seems like a self-inflicted wound (one of many).
https://thehill.com/latino/471928-to...Z9f4d_twozrQdQ TM |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
- No, she didnt get to go up. That would be awesome. - Yes, she got to take a photo with one of them once they brought it back (Mahler, I believe) - Yes, giving out CDs to family members at Christmas saying this is my CD that "won" a Grammy is kinda Bad Ass. SlaveNo(damn)More |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
|
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
this explains a lot
|
Unrelated to anything else...
Someone just forwarded this to me - 7 year old kid playing (and utterly killing) "Tom Sawyer".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR_x...ature=youtu.be This kid is going to sleep with 300 women before he's 14. SlaveNo(an American Hero)More |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
When did you fall off the turnip truck? SlaveNo(Leopold!)More |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
SlaveNo("Colluded with Nessie to build a build a forest kingdom")More |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
Edit- meaning her as the musician. Probably crossing a line. Ps you should keep posting to reinvigorate this board. |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
|
2112 = Saltpetre for Chicks
Quote:
|
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
I got to go to Carnegie Hall to help accept a Musical America Award one year - the experience was great, but the universe of people who get excited about such things is small. Of the 60 or so people at the winner's reception, the average classical music fan would recognize the names of about 30-40 of them. Hard to stop fan-boying in such a crowd. |
Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
Quote:
Might've been much more effective if he broke it down into verifiable and unverifiable stories. By lumping it all into one report with some absolute facts, some incorrect allegations, and some possibly true events and circumstances, he created a document easy to attack. I know you hate Taibbi, but regarding the point made in this article about journalists like Woodward "riding a wave" of public denunciation of the Dossier, you really should read Hate, Inc. Taibbi rips into that piling on phenomenon (among many others). It's caused by two things: 1. Media, including Woodward, doesn't have time to actually vet sources anymore; and, 2. There is a huge premium on commenting early and frequently, so whatever narrative takes shape quickly becomes the safest and easiest path to follow (easy because all you have to do is repackage prior comments from other equally uninformed commentators and "journalists"). It works like short term investing. Run with the herd. The most interesting issue in this cycle, which Taibbi doesn't address unfortunately (because I don't think anyone can really know), is whether the originators of the narrative onto which others pile on is acting on behalf of someone, or is just lazy. It'd be interesting as hell to see, when the Steele Dossier came out, who in the media first attacked it. Did Fox do so, followed by a litany of other right wing sources, which might indicate intent to discredit? Or did CNN do so, followed by by more moderate news sources, indicating either laziness, or perhaps a desire to appear even-handed and skeptical ("real news"). I wouldn't be surprised to discover there are war rooms at Fox and MSNBC which seek to shape the narrative by feeding "facts" about stories to lazy secondary news outlets. There's really no way to get caught doing this because, by the time all of the other outlets have repackaged the spin on facts an originating source has offered, no one can recall where the narrative started. It's suddenly credible by sheer volume of its repetition in various sources. |
Knock yourself out -- preen away.
Quote:
|
Re: Knock yourself out -- preen away.
Quote:
|
Re: Knock yourself out -- preen away.
Quote:
But I think if you read that book, which is highly entertaining in terms of style alone, you'll see that he's not engaging in mere both-sidesism. He's careful to assert that the right has less interest in facts, and is more cynical. But he also notes that the left is starting to follow suit, and starting to catch up with the right in that regard. His best critique is the one I cited - the swarm-of-screamers-on-speed mentality of modern media - which is more the fault of social media than anything else. As part of that, he argues news should never be a business. It's a public service element of traditional media. And it's becoming a business has turned it into a pusher. It can't let you off the hook for a second to formulate your own views, or to think "This isn't all that important." It feeds you constantly repackaged information designed to trigger anger or delight and get you locked into the next dopamine hit, or cortisol-and-adrenaline-fueled rage. Both sides may not be equally dishonest in the content they push, but both equally seek to monopolize your eyeballs regardless of damage to your mental health and the social fabric of the country. It's not his most organized and coherent book (The Divide is), but it's probably his most important. There are stretches of text where he dismantles the modern media business so well you wonder how he ever gets airtime anymore. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:43 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com