Re:Here's a question I have
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
If Ones opinion is intelligent and sound his ideas will last longer than any over zealous flamers. We need zealots to produce change, but rarely are they the thinkers of the group. So as long as your argument stands up to valid not lunatic criticism, forget about the silliness of zealots. As for opinions outside the slashdot group being subject to ridicule, once again we return to conservative ideas versus progressive ideas. In this case, you my friend are the liberal or progressive ideologue attempting to convince the conservatives (diehard slashdot folks in this case) to change their opinion. They are rigid traditionalist in this little slashdot society while you are the outsider.
Re:Here's a question I have
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
No no no. Biased reporting is fine. be it conservative, liberal, progressive, anarchic... any point of view. The problem is the lack of variety that should be feared. Objectivity is not possible to achieve with inherently subjective writers and editors so why attempt it? The best that can be hoped for is sound ideas backed by solid examples that creates a "noteworthy" news story open to criticism. Let the viewer choose to believe the story or mistrust the arguement. But unfortunately, when choice is restricted (i.e. one source) objectivity is suggested to be possible when it is not. You are obsessed with the black and white, Conservative or Liberal silliness of the US political structure. I was speaking on ideological terms not political. I was referring to the word conservative, meaning slow to change. My arguements were based on the word , not the Political identity most of this country claims to be. Call it whatever you want, traditional, indigenous, conservative, conformist, conventional, etc. As for stating my arguement as silly, you were the one complaining about conservatives being censored by the news media. My biggest fear is that a group or an individual will have the means to eliminate any mode of criticism by owning all the critics. Criticism is the closest thing in obtaining objectivity and truth. Why do you think slashdot works so well in this regard?
Re:Here's a question I have
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
My, my, my. old arguements never die...It is not a question of Liberal or conservative leanings with regards to the media. It is the slow but sure decline of noteworthy reporting in general, fewer indept studies and investigations. This will to the advantage to conservatives.. because the conservative identity, be it from any culture (US or not) maintains itself by limiting a group or individuals exposure to new concepts or contradictory ideas. Ergo, the word conservative is appropriate. So worry more about the lack of differences in reporting opinion not its leanings.
Slashdot Mirror
If Ones opinion is intelligent and sound his ideas will last longer than any over zealous flamers. We need zealots to produce change, but rarely are they the thinkers of the group. So as long as your argument stands up to valid not lunatic criticism, forget about the silliness of zealots. As for opinions outside the slashdot group being subject to ridicule, once again we return to conservative ideas versus progressive ideas. In this case, you my friend are the liberal or progressive ideologue attempting to convince the conservatives (diehard slashdot folks in this case) to change their opinion. They are rigid traditionalist in this little slashdot society while you are the outsider.
No no no. Biased reporting is fine. be it conservative, liberal, progressive, anarchic... any point of view. The problem is the lack of variety that should be feared. Objectivity is not possible to achieve with inherently subjective writers and editors so why attempt it? The best that can be hoped for is sound ideas backed by solid examples that creates a "noteworthy" news story open to criticism. Let the viewer choose to believe the story or mistrust the arguement. But unfortunately, when choice is restricted (i.e. one source) objectivity is suggested to be possible when it is not. You are obsessed with the black and white, Conservative or Liberal silliness of the US political structure. I was speaking on ideological terms not political. I was referring to the word conservative, meaning slow to change. My arguements were based on the word , not the Political identity most of this country claims to be. Call it whatever you want, traditional, indigenous, conservative, conformist, conventional, etc. As for stating my arguement as silly, you were the one complaining about conservatives being censored by the news media. My biggest fear is that a group or an individual will have the means to eliminate any mode of criticism by owning all the critics. Criticism is the closest thing in obtaining objectivity and truth. Why do you think slashdot works so well in this regard?
My, my, my. old arguements never die...It is not a question of Liberal or conservative leanings with regards to the media. It is the slow but sure decline of noteworthy reporting in general, fewer indept studies and investigations. This will to the advantage to conservatives.. because the conservative identity, be it from any culture (US or not) maintains itself by limiting a group or individuals exposure to new concepts or contradictory ideas. Ergo, the word conservative is appropriate. So worry more about the lack of differences in reporting opinion not its leanings.