Don't think this is going to get up
|
Don't think this is going to get up
Because we don't want our media degenerating into the type of media you enjoy over there.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tut
Yeah all that choice! Can't have that... Pravda... that's the ticket !
If the stuff being posted here are examples of media, then we don't want this type of thing in Australia. We don't suffer from a media that tries to drive a massive wedge between the left and right. We don't have a massive divide between the left and right and we want to keep it that way. The worst of the stuff I have seen posted as news, panders to the worst type of populist tripe.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yes, a public interest media advocate sounds like the ticket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
The problem is that you don't think the people are smart enough to make their choices... let the government decide what news the public can see. Great idea !Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
Which is amazingly like the DNC does using the lame stream media here...Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You report what we tell you to report or we will take away your White house Press credentials... and yes.. the WHite house IS that petty they actually have threatened a number of journalists with doing exactly that.
Speaking of haircuts, California is going after a retroactive tax grab. Seems they've decided they want $120 million back in tax breaks that were taken advantage of years ago. Nothing like offering a break only to demand it back, plus interest.
Nothing says "welcoming business environment" quite like a retroactive tax grab.Quote:
California's top-end taxpayers -- already steamed over a recent hike in the nation's highest state income tax -- are now fuming over a new $120 million retroactive tax grab on small business owners.
In December, the state's tax authority determined that a tax break claimed over the past few years by 2,500 entrepreneurs and stockholders of California-based small businesses is no longer valid and sent out notices of payment.
"How would you feel if you made a decision, which was made four years ago, (and) you absolutely knew was legally correct and four years later a governing body came in and said, 'no, it's not correct, now you owe us a bunch more money. And we're going to charge you interest on money you didn't even know you owed'," Brian Overstreet told Fox News from his office north of San Francisco.
Read more: California businesses fuming over retroactive $120M tax grab | Fox News
If they pull that off we should have retroactive elections and get rid of some politiions, the hell with elections not being due yet... ot the results of previous ones... Starting with HArry Ried, Nancy Pelosi Barbara Boxer and Diana Feinstein.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
And Barrak Obama.
Good luck with a do over, righties!
What a load of old gobbligook, you know what they say? You are what you eat, or consume. No prizes for guessing what you guys are consuming
Let enough businesses leave Kalifornistan for better parts and see how quick that can happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The Ides of March thing is coming true in Australia, right now the governing party; Labor, is voting on the leadership after speculation that has been running for a week and calls by senior members for a spill. It is unlikely Krudd (Brutus) to Julia's (Caeser) will return, Crassus (Crean) has been busy
The party knows it cannot survive the next election and tearing itself apart as it is doing will not save them
And it is all over and Krudd lives to continue his destabilisation. He will not be blamed for the electoral loss and will emerge triumphant after the election, he did the decent thing and allowed Julia to face the electorate, it cannot be said he goes back on his word I can't wait for his address over the corpse of caeser
You mean this brief history of Australian and overseas journalism that is light on details, but takes the trouble to throw in a few Orwellian type of analogies.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You seem to be a reflection of your media position on many issues. Taking the opportunity to draw a false dichotomy when ever possible. If you are going to draw a dichotomy then you may as well make it as gaping as possible.
You know the type of thing If we don't have a completely free press, then it must be a Soviet style operation.
The whole idea is to avoid drawing false dichotomies. The whole idea is to avoid creating a gaping rift between the left and right. You can have your style of media and we are happy to have ours.
What if there is a real rift? Should they not report it? Trust me there IS a real rift between left and right in the US. A war of ideas, and purpose.
From what I've seen I don't see your media as being all that different from ours other than the reach your state media has. Among your independent outlets I haven't seen much but disdain for the proposed regulations. I wonder why.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
You are pretty close to the mark. Except society didn't create the rift. The rift was created by the media.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Yes, they should report it and they do. Yes,it is a war of ideas, but it isn't a war of purpose. It is an ideological war.
The purpose Tut, is to set a direction for the future. The media is Americans too. Some are more biased than others.
The right in Australia has every legitimacy to express disdain with the media legislation. The legislation will not get through without some modification.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Even if the legislation were successful it would make no difference. The procedure should be to present the information to the public in an objective way. This is never possible, but the media can make an attempt to follow this guideline. And usually does in most cases.
There is no need to present the legislation as a false dichotomy. The legislation would not result in our media industry becoming a Pravda publication. This type of stuff is sensationalist, false and misleading.
The link you provided did make mention of a sensationalist editorial in one of its publication and the right defended itself by saying it was only suppose to be,"light entertainment with some humour".
The difference here is that newspapers(right or left) has the right to say these things in public, so long as they are prepared to take a public responsibility when they do.
Tut
A biased american now I didn't think there could be such a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Our media is kept relatively straight by the fact that we can and do absorb media from beyond our borders thus it is difficult to suppress a story for long, our media is not the tame dog of the ruling party hoping for a bone
Editorials are just that, they aren't intended to be taken as objective reporting.
Whose talking abot editorials I can't remember when I last read an editorial
Tut did, "The link you provided did make mention of a sensationalist editorial in one of its publication and the right defended itself by saying it was only suppose to be,"light entertainment with some humour"."Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
You may not read them but every Aussie paper I've browsed is full of them. The left here equates them with "news" for some reason. Editorials are by nature biased and I have no problem with that.
We believe in the free and open exchange of ideas... the left ;not so much.
Have you ever perused the forums of right-wing websites?Quote:
we believe in the free and open exchange of ideas
I've viewed both left and righty web sites. They both can tend to be on the crude side.
So you see, it's not a "right is better" issue.
Yes it is ,because it's the left that wants to control it . I'm fine with it .
What??
Having comprehension troubles still? No one on the right is trying to silence others, the left not only tries on a regular basis they've expended much energy trying to legislate the free and open exchange of ideas. We believe in free speech, them not so much.
How are they trying to legislate against the free and open exchange of ideas?
Liberals have been trying to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine in some form for decades. We've discussed it here many times, they can't compete with conservative talk radio so they want it gagged or equal time, but mostly they just want it GONE.
And the same is true in Australia where Red Julia is just itiching for regulations to control the press.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Isn't that an editorial? Where's the legislation you referred to?Quote:
so they want it gagged or equal time, but mostly they just want it GONE.
I realize you're just trying to trap me but it never works out for you. The answer to both of your questions was in my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
(Hint: notice the big heading at the link that says "CNN Opinion", hence my acknowledgement of what they "want"). Try and keep up.Quote:
Liberals have been trying to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine in some form for decades. We've discussed it here many times, they can't compete with conservative talk radio so they want it gagged or equal time, but mostly they just want it GONE.
Has it changed the law, or is it still in the hollering stage?
CNN isn't a political party that can change law nor do they represent liberal platforms.Quote:
notice the big heading at the link that says "CNN Opinion", hence my acknowledgement of what they "want")
No law has been changed and Obama has been at the helm for how many years now?
Well that was a totally pointless response to my point.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:20 AM. |