Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm
If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm
If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.
Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm
If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.
Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?
People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.
Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.
Last edited by serrano on Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm
If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.
Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?
People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.
Eta: I know that my statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The “illegal immigrant” term is now clickbait, full stop.
Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:50 pm
If I run a highly publicized series in my newspapers profiling victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and only those victims, I am not being "objective" even if everything I report is true.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.
Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?
People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.
Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.
Not to threadjack a threadjack, but why the nomenclature change when talking about slavery? Does “enslaved people” give a (completely accurate and justifiable) humanization to them, where “slaves” does not?
My avatar corresponds on my place in the Swamp posting list with the all-time Home Run list. Number 45 is Paul Konerko with 439.
That’s not journalism. That’s a collection of interviews with victims of crime by illegal immigrants to reach a biased conclusion.
What's biased about "13 people were brutally murdered by illegal immigrants last year"?
As Delaware pointed out - “illegal immigrant” implies bias, and you’re engaging in selling headlines for profit...Both can call your journalism into question.
The elephant in the room of course is the speed of which we start to form opinions on news events occurs before we read the stories.
FIne, call them undocumented immigrants. And every newspaper every day is selling headlines for profit.
Edit: Actually, hold on. Why are you concluding that "illegal immigrant" is biased or un-objective? They are in fact immigrants, right? Who immigrated illegally? If your standard is "journalism should be fact based, and fact based in objective", isn't "illegal immigrant" a fact-based, objective term?
People are not illegal. It’s a biased designation.
Eta: I know that May statement sounds naive, but it’s a pejorative label that has become such through its contemporary shorthand meaning. It’s why I try when teaching, to use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves” when I’m in those units. The term is now clickbait, full stop.
Not to threadjack a threadjack, but why the nomenclature change when talking about slavery? Does “enslaved people” give a (completely accurate and justifiable) humanization to them, where “slaves” does not?
I’m not sure when I started to do this, but to me the term “enslaved people” or “persons” highlights the humanity of the person who is legally owned by another person. It might just help at least one student identify the people we are talking about in terms of their condition rather than their race. I try to use the term enslaver instead of master. I think language matters to some degree. Does it work? I don’t know, but it’s my classroom, so...
mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 3:53 pm
"What I'm saying is your wife has, uh, performed fellatio so in the literal sense, um, calling her a 'cocksucker' is indeed fact based."
Exactly my point. You can't judge whether something is okay by whether it's fact based.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
I'm assuming this won't warrant its own thread, but QAnon nutter Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene filed Articles of Impeachment against President Biden. Wheeee!!!!
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:13 pm
I mean... So what?
You can file all you want, doesn't mean anyone has to do anything about it.
I know there is no chance of anything coming out of this, just pointing out the nuttiness Trumpism unleashed.
I believe she is saving herself.. IMO with the FBI looking at Parler now and it's effect on January 6th riot I believe it's going to come out her and Laura Boebert had involvement and they will be thrown out of congress. In that case she will say her ejection was do to her impeachment of Biden.
mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:00 pm
He's had a great 30 hours. No complaints at all.
Plenty of complaints on my FB feed and from FoxNews. My favorite theme is Biden destroying unity because of Jen Psaki's pressers. Several Fox segments blaming Biden because the press is asking Psaki softballs and being nice while she treats them respectfully. My favorite was a panel with Matt Schlapp and some Liberal woman where they showed 2 softball questions then showed 4 cherry picked questions from 4 years and the host saying, "see? Look at how differently the press treats Biden. This is proof that Biden's calls for unity is a lie." So many things wrong... The Liberal couldn't stop laughing at the two idiots saying "are we on another planet right now?"
Meanwhile, my moron cousin's almost as dumb kid is freaking out that Biden prevented Trump's border wall from completing out of spite. They were just 350 miles away from finishing the wall, and all the materials purchased, but Biden is destroying the country so Trump can't claim a victory in building the wall.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 4:42 pm
I'm assuming this won't warrant its own thread, but QAnon nutter Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene filed Articles of Impeachment against President Biden. Wheeee!!!!
And this may not be nothing right now, but 2022 is my fear.. The dems can lose the house in 2022 as they lost several seats this past election, but they can pick up 3 Senate seats in Wisky, PA, and NC.
mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:51 pm
Maybe I’m a big dummy, but I thought they were like hurricanes where you plan and mitigate harm but you can’t prevent.
I don’t see why not. Pay attention to outbreaks and react quickly to stop them from spreading to become pandemic. Maybe you can’t stop all of them, but some?
Isn’t that what happened with Ebola?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.