I don't see a problem with editorial comment prefaced as such, and consider it a long stretch away from corporate sponsored mantra. I doubt even Walter Cronkite and his contemporaries could have predicted the power grab of future television news.
Not watched or listened to ANY news for well over 2 years now, save for what comes on between songs on the radio if I can’t change the channel quick enough. Its been amazing. Apathy is one of the best drugs around!
As the late great Ricky Ricardo once stated, "ignorance is bliss!"
They used to report the News, then if opinions were aired they did it as "Editorial Comment" and viewers were told up front, usually a small segment toward the end of the news show.
Could have been a local station or national one.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Still remember it. Still dislike him intensely for it. It was his opinion, and he was wrong. Johnson and the Whiz Kids cabinet were wrong. We started losing wars when we stopped fighting with a WWII mindset.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Commentators, by their job, are expected to voice their own political opinions. That's the "comment" part of commentator.
I think that what a lot of people have issue with is the press and journalists - the town criers - telling you not just the news but what to think. That's the job of the commentator/pundit. The journalist should just tell what happened.
Likewise the pundit should not be mistaken for the journalist. One should expect the pundits to pick and choose the information they relay, along with any corroborating evidence. The issue there is when the pundit is taken for a journalist and people think they are getting the whole, unvarnished truth.
It's a temporary restraining order in preparation for a pending case. Fifth amendment, no due process.
Of note: the judge stated that while he didn't necessarily agree with the precedents, he felt he had to use them. Also he noted that Pres. Trump does not have to acknowledge or call on Acosta.
It's a temporary restraining order in preparation for a pending case. Fifth amendment, no due process.
Of note: the judge stated that while he didn't necessarily agree with the precedents, he felt he had to use them. Also he noted that Pres. Trump does not have to acknowledge or call on Acosta.
When Trump has another press conference with Acosta present, just have a half dozen of the biggest, baddest, evil looking Secret Service Agents between the President and Acosta. Might make that asshat Acosta reconsider another 'incident' and take a chill pill.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
I realize Im not a super smart know it all politician and big time reality tv star business man. But how hard would it be to have a remote mic kill switch at the podium???
I realize Im not a super smart know it all politician and big time reality tv star business man. But how hard would it be to have a remote mic kill switch at the podium???
You'd also need a remote mouth kill switch on Acosta for that to work reliably. If ya just killed the mic, Acosta would keep on spewing like a broken sewer pipe!
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Replies
As the late great Ricky Ricardo once stated, "ignorance is bliss!"
"If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
― Douglas Adams
I think that what a lot of people have issue with is the press and journalists - the town criers - telling you not just the news but what to think. That's the job of the commentator/pundit. The journalist should just tell what happened.
Likewise the pundit should not be mistaken for the journalist. One should expect the pundits to pick and choose the information they relay, along with any corroborating evidence. The issue there is when the pundit is taken for a journalist and people think they are getting the whole, unvarnished truth.
"If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
Of note: the judge stated that while he didn't necessarily agree with the precedents, he felt he had to use them. Also he noted that Pres. Trump does not have to acknowledge or call on Acosta.
― Douglas Adams
― Douglas Adams
― Douglas Adams