sparky wrote:.
I've got no problem with political advocacy ,
what Irk me the most is sloppy , uniformed articles written by a hack who didn't spend ten minutes googling the facts first
that's not journalism , that advertisement
For some time, certain critics have been suggesting that the mainstream press gives a little too much credence to dubious conspiracy theories about Russia, theories which many Democrats have embraced out of their desire to undermine Donald Trump. Liberal commentators like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann are beginning to sound a bit like Glenn Beck during the peak of the chalkboard-years. Any claim about nefarious doings by Vladimir Putin—for instance, that Russia hacked Vermont’s electric grid, or that the Naked Capitalism blog is Russian state propaganda—is spread widely by pundits without particular regard for the actual substantiating evidence.
Of course, one may disagree with this. One may believe that the media’s treatment of the Russia-Trump nexus has been sober and reasonable. But a new data point suggests otherwise: the New York Times recently published a piece on Russian hacking by Louise Mensch. And a world where the Paper of Record publishes Mensch is not a world with a sane public conversation about Russia.
Liberal New York Times Subscribers Canceling in Droves over Anti-Global Warming Column
After becoming the darling of the left with his long list of stark, never-Trump columns, writer Bret Stephens has become a sudden pariah among his newfound fans by writing a column that mildly questioned the validity of global warming. And now, after months of celebrating him as a “sensible” Republican, New York Times readers are canceling their subscriptions in droves over his “climate denying” article.
Because of the unhinged attack, Stephens noted that he is being reminded of just how filled with hate an intolerance the left really is.
Indeed, global warming fans have launched #ShowYourCancellation, a Twitter hashtag campaign to urge New York Times subscribers to dump the paper.
Stephens, an establishment Republican and a former Wall Street Journal writer, was hired by the New York Times after spending the past many months uncorking a wave of anti-Trump columns. But with his debut column for the “paper of record,” Stephens chided climate change believers for being so certain of their belief despite the lack of full scientific support for their religious-like global warming tenets.
In his column, Stephens said that “claiming total certainty about the science” of climate change and not taking the facts from both sides “traduces the spirit of science and creates openings for doubt whenever a climate claim proves wrong.”
But after the mild column debuted, a wave of hate rolled over both Stephens and the Times because the columnist dared to question climate change.
Liberals have called for the Times to fire Stephens over the “climate denying” column with a petition at Change.org that has already gained nearly 30,000 signers.
The petition charges that the paper itself has now somehow joined the ranks of “deniers”:
The hire of Mr. Stephens compromises The New York Times especially because the fossil fuel industry and its media echo chamber are spreading the lie that science continues to debate whether climate change is real, whether humans are causing it, and whether it has adverse impacts on America and the globe. The New York Times has now entered that echo chamber. The Times now legitimates the lie that human-caused climate change is a political opinion to be debated, when in reality human-caused climate change is a truth already discovered by scientific inquiry.
Along with the petition, a wave of tweets has inundated the paper with calls for the columnist to be fired in one hate-filled tweet after another.
One Twitter user told Stephens to “Go eat dog d***s,” while another claimed that Stephens is trending on Twitter because, he said, “You suck.”
Even other purported journalists are tweeting attacks on the Times and Stephens.
Liberal columnist Monica Potts, who writes for such outlets as Vogue, The Daily Beast, and the New York Times, called Stephens’ column “irresponsible”:
NYT Opinion
✔
@nytopinion
When it comes to climate change the threat is clear. Well, not entirely, says @BretStephensNYT. http://nyti.ms/2oGaVEi pic.twitter.com/y4HHSztZjq
@MonicaBPotts
@nytopinion @BretStephensNYT This is so irresponsible. For many readers, anything that comes out of the times has its authority. They don't know you hired an idiot.
4:26 PM - 28 Apr 2017
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
ralfy wrote:From 2012:
"These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America"
http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6- ... ica-2012-6
Similar takes place for food production, etc.
sparky wrote:Reading the above contributions make my head spin ,
there is nothing like the future to test past opinions
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Return to North America Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests