Good News...Bad News...Good News - Page 3 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-20-2008, 09:10 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Oh dear, you mean the man might possibly be human?
Shane is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-20-2008, 09:11 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewprof View Post
Nothing to get any traction from that article!
The first article appears to be much like a character piece where the authors are addressing the suggested character flaw that McCain trusts his own integrity so much that he doesn't see if he is moving over a line.

That part is interesting only in context of the apparent concerns of his staff to keep him from a lobbyist who may or may not be anything more than a friend.

The third element of concern was if she helped write, or influenced the writing of Telecommunications legislation.

To me the first article [the NYT piece] WOULD have been nothing, would have not received RED Drudge Headlines if it had not been for the extremely strong pushback from the McCain campaign.

Now I know that if there were an insinuation against me I would do the same so I can't fault them for that approach but everything in the article is just too easily proven, too easily shown and the article goes out of its way to say that the "affair" was just a rumor, a concern and denied by all [including third parties].

So what was the focus of the article? The rumored affair? Flawed character judgment? Lobbyist influence?

And I certainly agree, there is precious little from which to get traction.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #23 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 11:43 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
Are you suggesting that vetting a story is the same as proving it? I hope not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
I am strongly suggesting that vetting the facts of a story of this magnitude equal proving it. If you can't vet the facts, the story would not hold up for print. If you can vet the facts, that is the proof.
This conversation got me thinking last night so during this morning's NYU conference call on one of my Media and Culture classes I decided to bring it up since the NYT article was pretty much the opening topic of conversation prior to starting anyway. I posited the question "In modern Journalism is the quality level of vetting of facts in a story of the magnitude of this type of political piece equal to proving the story as factual?" The debate took all the 90 minutes plus longer for some of us who stayed on as long as we could.

The consensus was that first tier print media tends to be much more deliberate and concise in their vetting of stories as they take time to build a story with multiple sources and multiple resources, each cross checking themselves. The conversation brought up both Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass and how their conduct pushed print journalism to new levels of self scrutiny. Janet Cooke was also used as an example.

Broadcast media, with their 24/7 headline mentality seems to have less respect within the community for their vetting quality. Examples of errors were literally coming to fast for me to take notes. Suffice to say that Foxnews got the brunt of the criticism and one of their executive producers is a member of our class. He was somewhat quiet, though pointed out that in many cases the 30,000 foot level stories were correct even though the details were not always up to snuff and they considered "getting the story out" the top priority.

The primary example of vetting issues was the Dan Rather experience and how it went wrong, why and the ramifications both to the integrity of the media AND to how the media now vets material for broadcast or publication.

The general consensus on the NYT article was 1) the article spent too much of its time on the rumor aspect, 2) the focus should have been on the "potentials of impropriety" and 3) they would not have published without having all their ducks in a row.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #24 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 12:09 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
This conversation got me thinking last night so during this morning's NYU conference call on one of my Media and Culture classes I decided to bring it up since the NYT article was pretty much the opening topic of conversation prior to starting anyway. I posited the question "In modern Journalism is the quality level of vetting of facts in a story of the magnitude of this type of political piece equal to proving the story as factual?" The debate took all the 90 minutes plus longer for some of us who stayed on as long as we could.

The consensus was that first tier print media tends to be much more deliberate and concise in their vetting of stories as they take time to build a story with multiple sources and multiple resources, each cross checking themselves. The conversation brought up both Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass and how their conduct pushed print journalism to new levels of self scrutiny. Janet Cooke was also used as an example.

Broadcast media, with their 24/7 headline mentality seems to have less respect within the community for their vetting quality. Examples of errors were literally coming to fast for me to take notes. Suffice to say that Foxnews got the brunt of the criticism and one of their executive producers is a member of our class. He was somewhat quiet, though pointed out that in many cases the 30,000 foot level stories were correct even though the details were not always up to snuff and they considered "getting the story out" the top priority.

The primary example of vetting issues was the Dan Rather experience and how it went wrong, why and the ramifications both to the integrity of the media AND to how the media now vets material for broadcast or publication.

The general consensus on the NYT article was 1) the article spent too much of its time on the rumor aspect, 2) the focus should have been on the "potentials of impropriety" and 3) they would not have published without having all their ducks in a row.
Excellent.

I will add that these issues, true or not, cannot be ignored and should not be covered-up. It is the news media's duty to investigate & report, come what may. It is our job to put them in perspective.

having said all that, I wish that the reporters had spent less verbiage on the sleaze, innuendo and unnamed sources. Using unnamed sources is cowardly and borderline dishonest.

B

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #25 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 12:23 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
Excellent.

I will add that these issues, true or not, cannot be ignored and should not be covered-up. It is the news media's duty to investigate & report, come what may. It is our job to put them in perspective.

having said all that, I wish that the reporters had spent less verbiage on the sleaze, innuendo and unnamed sources. Using unnamed sources is cowardly and borderline dishonest.

B
We discuss that part all the time. Unfortunately it is the only way to get some valid information out.

I know that I have been used as "unnamed source" a couple of times in corporate stories where the questions asked of me were valid, the answers I provided were valid but had I provided my name I would have either been fired or move off project. I also know that in both instances other people were also interviewed to corroborate the information. I know that in some instances "Unnamed source" is a composite. Most news sources have to go to extra lengths to verify the information [in my case, I gave my name, position and connections to both the reporters and editor under a signed document that they would not use my name]. I was not just chit chat.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #26 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 12:31 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
We discuss that part all the time. Unfortunately it is the only way to get some valid information out.

I know that I have been used as "unnamed source" a couple of times in corporate stories where the questions asked of me were valid, the answers I provided were valid but had I provided my name I would have either been fired or move off project. I also know that in both instances other people were also interviewed to corroborate the information. I know that in some instances "Unnamed source" is a composite. Most news sources have to go to extra lengths to verify the information [in my case, I gave my name, position and connections to both the reporters and editor under a signed document that they would not use my name]. I was not just chit chat.
Not saying unnamed sources are always wrong, saying they should be used sparing and onlyif the story is sufficiently compelling to warrant them. In my (ahem) editorial opinion this particular story would have been just as sleazy with or without the "unnamed sources. In this instance, the unnamed sources lent the story greater credibility than it deserved.

Not saying it should have been suppressed. Downplayed. Or leave it for a less reputable paper to run. It's the New York Times for crissake.

B

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #27 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 02:04 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Jayhawk's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: S500/W220/2000
Location: Lawrence, KS (USA)
Posts: 21,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
That story is (so far) just a whole buncha noise about nothing. It comes across as a blatant, baseless and shameless attempt by the media to influence the election, and nothing more. Damn the authors, not the subject.
In other words: A typical New York Times hatchet-job!

It's enough to make me want to vote for the guy! She's not bad for 40+!!


Don't believe everything you think

Last edited by Jayhawk; 02-21-2008 at 02:09 PM.
Jayhawk is offline  
post #28 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 02:14 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Jayhawk's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: S500/W220/2000
Location: Lawrence, KS (USA)
Posts: 21,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
No doubt.

Gawd what a f-king insane system.

The only thing worse would be if there were no free speech and no intense public scrutiny of the candidates.
But trying to defend this NYT hatchet-job as a free speech issue is just plain ridiculous! Hell, they're giving the National Inquirer a good name!! Free speech my ass!! It has nothing to do w/ free speech!

Talk about your drive-by media...

Don't believe everything you think
Jayhawk is offline  
post #29 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 03:02 PM
DP
Moderator
 
DP's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,125
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 991 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayhawk View Post
In other words: A typical New York Times hatchet-job!

It's enough to make me want to vote for the guy! She's not bad for 40+!!

You're crazy, she looks like she is melting from some radiation or something ewwww
Jayhawk, you fail at identifying milfs worth looking at
DP is offline  
post #30 of 43 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 03:09 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
She got da botox smile!

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    On Borrowed Time...Good News and Bad News Charlies84380SE W126 S,SE,SEC,SEL,SD,SDL Class 8 11-20-2007 07:05 PM
    Sirius Starmate - Good news and bad news Zut R171 SLK-Class 7 01-17-2006 10:32 PM
    Good news or Bad news...Every1 read... MHPHOCKEY W163 M-Class 25 03-18-2003 08:53 PM
    Good news, CD changer installed and working. Bad news, C-pillar rub... Brian R170 SLK-Class 11 10-05-2001 12:42 PM
    Spring change...good news, bad news Jon R170 SLK-Class 1 06-24-2001 01:54 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome