The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • frank ryan
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 12257

    #5221
    Originally posted by HuskyFreeNorthwest View Post
    Responsible journalism, I wonder why that medium is dying?
    They're not dying because they are doing this;they are doing this because they are dying.
    Originally posted by creekster View Post
    Not really. That's about equally irresponsible for a supposedly serious newspaper.
    I don't the idea all that shocking or awful. To me, it just seems like the Globe is trying to be a magazine instead of a newspaper.

    Comment

    • All-American
      Right, as Usual
      • Nov 2008
      • 15637

      #5222
      Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
      They're not dying because they are doing this;they are doing this because they are dying.

      I don't the idea all that shocking or awful. To me, it just seems like the Globe is trying to be a magazine instead of a newspaper.
      I actually don't see anything wrong with it. Satire is a long and proud part of American journalism's heritage. In fact, didn't Ben Franklin publish his Silence Dogood letters in Boston?
      τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν

      Comment

      • Jeff Lebowski
        Corporate lackey for Jesus
        • Nov 2008
        • 69413

        #5223
        Originally posted by All-American View Post
        I actually don't see anything wrong with it. Satire is a long and proud part of American journalism's heritage. In fact, didn't Ben Franklin publish his Silence Dogood letters in Boston?
        Yes. In the New England Courant.
        "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
        "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
        "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

        Comment

        • Moliere
          One man.....one pie
          • Oct 2009
          • 27764

          #5224
          Originally posted by HuskyFreeNorthwest View Post
          Responsible journalism, I wonder why that medium is dying?
          Responsible journalism isn't dying...it's moving over to Buzzfeed.
          "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

          Comment

          • Northwestcoug
            Cocked and Loaded
            • May 2011
            • 17886

            #5225
            Yeah, I regained a lot of respect for traditional journalism after 'Spotlight'. But then the Globe goes and does something juvenile like this. It is pretty pathetic.
            "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
            "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
            - SeattleUte

            Comment

            • USUC
              Chronic Poseur
              • Apr 2010
              • 8775

              #5226
              Uh... What's the big deal? Isn't this just the front page of the editorial section? The editorial pages of many newspapers have warned people of Trump. How is a satirical piece much different (especially if a follow up op ed piece explains it)? What am I missing?

              Comment

              • Northwestcoug
                Cocked and Loaded
                • May 2011
                • 17886

                #5227
                Originally posted by USUC View Post
                Uh... What's the big deal? Isn't this just the front page of the editorial section? The editorial pages of many newspapers have warned people of Trump. How is a satirical piece much different (especially if a follow up op ed piece explains it)? What am I missing?
                It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The last thing traditional journalism needs to do is be associated with anything that smacks of fake/made up news stories.
                "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
                "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
                - SeattleUte

                Comment

                • old_gregg
                  scaly man fish
                  • Nov 2009
                  • 16915

                  #5228
                  bernie jeff immelt/the real world




                  It’s easy to make hollow campaign promises and take cheap shots in speeches and during editorial board sessions, but U.S. companies have to deliver for their employees, customers and shareholders every day. GE operates in the real world. We’re in the business of building real things and generating real growth for a nation that needs it now more than ever. I’m proud of all that we do, and how it all figures into “the moral fabric” of America is so plain to me. It seems Sen. Sanders is missing the point.
                  Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

                  Comment

                  • USUC
                    Chronic Poseur
                    • Apr 2010
                    • 8775

                    #5229
                    Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
                    It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The last thing traditional journalism needs to do is be associated with anything that smacks of fake/made up news stories.
                    I absolutely agree that something like this placed in the "hard news" portions of a newspaper would set a bad precedent and should limit the amount of trust placed in that newspaper. If I am wrong and the Globe did not run this in the opinion pages, I apologize.

                    Comment

                    • falafel
                      loves to talk on things
                      • Mar 2009
                      • 37836

                      #5230
                      Originally posted by USUC View Post
                      I absolutely agree that something like this placed in the "hard news" portions of a newspaper would set a bad precedent and should limit the amount of trust placed in that newspaper. If I am wrong and the Globe did not run this in the opinion pages, I apologize.
                      I heard the opinion editor in NPR this morning. She basically said that there has never been a candidate like Donald Trump before and the opinion people felt like they had to comment on it.
                      Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

                      Dig your own grave, and save!

                      "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

                      "I know that you are one of the cool and 'edgy' BYU fans" -- Wally

                      GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

                      Comment

                      • Northwestcoug
                        Cocked and Loaded
                        • May 2011
                        • 17886

                        #5231
                        Originally posted by USUC View Post
                        I absolutely agree that something like this placed in the "hard news" portions of a newspaper would set a bad precedent and should limit the amount of trust placed in that newspaper. If I am wrong and the Globe did not run this in the opinion pages, I apologize.
                        Does this look like an opinion page to you?

                        Cfn5lAiVIAgNxj9.jpg
                        "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
                        "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
                        - SeattleUte

                        Comment

                        • frank ryan
                          Senior Member
                          • Nov 2008
                          • 12257

                          #5232
                          Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
                          Does this look like an opinion page to you?

                          [ATTACH=CONFIG]6839[/ATTACH]
                          There is a disclaimer in red on that page that explains it is an editorial. I like it. It's creative. You can run editorials on the front page if it is marked as so.

                          Comment

                          • Northwestcoug
                            Cocked and Loaded
                            • May 2011
                            • 17886

                            #5233
                            Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
                            There is a disclaimer in red on that page that explains it is an editorial. I like it. It's creative. You can run editorials on the front page if it is marked as so.
                            To each his own. For me, it blurs the distinction between news and opinion. The internet already does that, and it's easier to access. Why would traditional journalism, whose sole claim to relevancy in this current climate is legitimacy, do something to damage that?
                            "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
                            "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
                            - SeattleUte

                            Comment

                            • frank ryan
                              Senior Member
                              • Nov 2008
                              • 12257

                              #5234
                              Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
                              To each his own. For me, it blurs the distinction between news and opinion. The internet already does that, and it's easier to access. Why would traditional journalism, whose sole claim to relevancy in this current climate is legitimacy, do something to damage that?
                              There is precedent for opinion on the front page, even cartoons. I think the globe is trying to sell papers. That's why they did that.

                              Comment

                              • Northwestcoug
                                Cocked and Loaded
                                • May 2011
                                • 17886

                                #5235
                                Originally posted by frank ryan View Post
                                There is precedent for opinion on the front page, even cartoons. I think the globe is trying to sell papers. That's why they did that.
                                Of course. That's not in dispute. But I think they damaged their credibility doing it.
                                "...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
                                "You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
                                - SeattleUte

                                Comment

                                Working...