Slashdot Mirror
2005 Foot In Mouth Awards
jollyroger1210 writes "Wired is running a story on the 2005 Foot In Mouth Awards." From the article: "Tech execs say the darndest things. And so do shuffling presidents, and disgraced scientists, and Wikipedia fakers. It's time to relive 2005's biggest spoken gaffes."
I'm going to sacrafice some karma for this, but I truly don't care.
First of all, who cares if Slashdot posts it a little late?
Honestly, Some of us do not visit 'digg' or any of that crap. Why? Becasue it's full of little children who have no idea what they're talking about.
So if it was posted there first, who cares? No one, except for you and the other 'anti-slashdot' kids. If you're so enthralled in the fact that 'digg' posts it first then, guess what? Go there and read digg.
I, personally, am going to stay here at slashdot. Why? Because I can actually get smarter by reading some posts. I just got more ignorant trying to decrypt the aol-leet-speek-kid posts at Digg.
Slashdot may have it's share of problems, but it also has some great minds that read it and contribute.
this guy http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/23/15 13203&tid=141&tid=158&tid=3&tid=106
Well said! Regular readers all know that Slashdot, editorially, is fairly mediocre. Awful editing and spelling, frequent duplicate posts, and so on. But it's the moderation system and comments that make it shine. Where else can you read astrophysicists discuss the latest astronomy finding, or professional engineers dissecting the latest technology invention? Thanks to moderation, the best posts rise to the top.
The one time I visited Digg, I found the comments worthless.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Man, get over it. Like the Swift Boat Vets, the Dan Rather story is more a case of corruption and blog bullying than anything else, it's definitely not "a return to truth in journalism", or whatever you may think it is. They decided what they wanted to say, shoved their fingers in their ears and screamed "it's fake" until someone noticed.
It was more about PR cleanup than fact checking. The question is not "is this legit?", but "how can we manipulate belief"? They had people discussing how to tear it down within 10 or 15 minutes of its first airing. The qualifications of the people discussing the matter? Well, it's a memo. You could ask people in print manufacturing, or forensics. You could ask an army desk jockey. You could even ask any secretary old enough to have used one of those typewriters. Instead, it was freepers, marketing people, PR, politicians, newscasters, paid political operatives(bloggers!), and the like. Oh, and a few computer guys. Most weren't even born yet in the era of that typewriter or Bush's service.
Me? I work in printing. The family business is printing, and my father was in computer repair for decades. My childhood was spent with inky fingers, learning programming or fixing hardware. So, I know both areas pretty well, and I didn't buy it. The really clever thing is that the real point of the matter was "did Bush fulfill obligations?" not the placement of a fucking letter or apostrophe. Kudos on making sure the voting public avoided that question and discussed decades old typewriters instead.
It's an exercise in the efficiency of the conservative political machine. You're not even discussing the topic at hand. You're discussing 2004 in a "let's remember 2005" comments section. We should both be modded for being offtopic. And you should learn that you can't reuse calenders.
Some just don't get it. USA, where sex with one person is more important than war with another country.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
How about the award for the Media for about the past decade?
They didn't start to give crappy, over-hyped reports on Katrina -- they actually somewhat improved reporting for a brief moment. But News Reporters follow "stories" not truth, not justice, not anything but what makes the best "story."
And don't feel left out that they didn't report White Misery -- yes, In know there are other place besides New Orleans -- but you are talking about a media that spent about 3 months in Aruba chasing down one white girl. If you had wanted coverage, you would have had to run around in large, naked groups with funny hats. Just getting killed doesn't count.
So, insipid, useless infotainment driven by PR flacks is the norm in News today. Screaming about the travails of a minority occasionally does nothing to upset the status quo.
And it is pretty obvious to me that the Weathermen over hype any bad weather. That's why it's so hard for people to decide whether to evacuate or not -- because any Hurricane will admonishments about the last group who didn't heed the weathermen. Nothing makes a weather persons day than to interrupt regularly scheduled programming with a weather alert. The only News here is that the News Service has been dead for some time.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Acts like Hitler with his absolutism and vyings for complete control... thinks like a baboon with his lack of understanding and unintelligent arguements/commentary.