Subject:
|
Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:38:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1224 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In any case, he is certainly not advocating in any
way, shape, or form what the headline read. You must acknowledge that.
|
The headline doesn’t suggest one way or the other that Bennett is advocating
anything.
|
Really? “Abort all black babies and cut crime, says Republican”. That doesn’t
come off as a proposal? Please.
| |
It is reporting what he said, then goes on to chronicle the
incident itself and the reaction to it. Giving abbreviated but accurate
headlines is what the purpose of a headline is.
|
Therein lies the rub-- “accurate”.
| |
Would you have preferred “Republican radio talk show host used
questionable-yet-accurate rhetorical device while in debate with caller
concerning race, abortion, crime, and economics”?
|
That’s my whole point, Lenny! It is a non-story. The “story” comes as a
result of the headline. They are manufacturing the news.
| |
| |
And the smear works like a charm. For instead of debating the sleezeball
journalism practiced by the Guardian (which was the topic of my post), we
are talking about Bennett, and whether he’s a racist, and when was the last
time he beat his wife.
|
I disagree. I had no real idea what your initial post was about. You raised
an issue but didn’t provide enough of a topic to guide the discussion where
you wanted it to go. The topic was Bennett’s racist comment, so that’s where
the discussion went.
|
What racist comment!!! <wrings hands>
| |
However, I disagree that the Guardian is doing anything out of the ordinary.
If the headline is what is bothering you, then the fairly straight forward
and complete news-story below should have made you feel better. I didn’t see
anything in story that seemed overly biased, and certainly nothing that was
libelous.
|
The entire story bothered me, because it isn’t “news”. It is exactly along the
lines of the beating your wife bit.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) That is an accurate summary of what he said. It's not up to the headline to provide the context; that's what the article and the original transcript are for. I suspect that you're taking issue with the use of "Republican" here, and that's not (...) (19 years ago, 4-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) The headline doesn't suggest one way or the other that Bennett is advocating anything. It is reporting what he said, then goes on to chronicle the incident itself and the reaction to it. Giving abbreviated but accurate headlines is what the (...) (19 years ago, 4-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
