Does somebody at NOAA finally get it?

Jo Schaper wrote:

A) All media outlets have a bias, even those who claim to have no bias.

Good God, Jo, ... Have a Bex and a lie-down. This sounds like
*SPEAKING OUT* - a hatchet job on media outlets, even. Now what about
something similar on so-called science journals - and Plate Tectonics?
(...seing as to how this is a geology forum - an 'at.)

Scott Nudds wrote:
John" wrote

That's all we offer these days. Our media has signed on with Satan.
If we want real news we have to tune into DW-TV, BBC and other
international outlets.


Well you see, the profit motive improves everything. Now that the news
has been replaced with what people want to see as measured by ratings -
INFOTAINMENT - the quality of news has grown to levels unimaginable before.

Now if only Congress would kill PBS, and the picture would be complete.

- covering real news costs money - presenting pablum is cheap!
If you listened to PBS radio a while back - you know, when GW appointed
the new head of CPB.
And they had a mandate to present unbiased news "because PBS was too
liberal".
I listened to the shift in editorial and coverage over following months
and the talk about their new mandate.
- that was until PBS broke the news of e-mails from the head of CPB
directing the news programing to be more administration friendly. - Of
course he had to leave his post and eventually CPB for good. - I think
he messed with the wrong group - I hope PBS can take care of itself
(with your support)
PBS radio and raw wire feeds off the Internet are about the best you can
do for American news nowadays.
I used to listen to to CBC (canadian) when I could get it.

In article ,
Brian Thorn wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 00:14:29 GMT, "John" wrote:

Yes, there's always Fox News and CNS and Rush Limaugh

Ah yes, the Ministry of Propaganda. AKA TBN (The Bush Network).

A direct result of CNN, which at one time at least had the pretext of
impartiality, throwing its reputation in the dumpster with the
ludicrous "Tailwind" story, aka "we don't have a real good story to
launch our new nightly newsmagazine show, so we'll just make one up."

After that, all protestations of Rush and Fox News being mouthpieces
for the Right just stank of hypocrisy.

Brian

ROTFL. Ever watch Faux News? Their idea of "balanced" is someone who
supports Bush and someone who's to the right of Bush.

In article .com,
"raylopez99" wrote:
You're as nuts as the website you promote in your .sig file. You
believe in Rozwell Aliens and Area 51 too, Tom-MASS?

Idiot.

FYI, the Mauna Loa site was threatened by shutdown in the early 1980s,
by R. Reagan, who has the right impulse, as usual.

Yes, by all means, shut down science because it often conflicts with (1)
business interests and (2) religious fundamentalists.


And NOAA no doubt wants to shut down Mauna Loa for sound reasons too.

(1) or (2)?

I have speculated that the nepotistic M.L. needs outside
supervision--why entrust it to a father-son fanatic team? They claim
not to be influenced by gasses from nearby towns, but I don't believe
it--Hawaii suffers from not only UHI but CO2 pollution as well.

RL

In article ,
h (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:45:56 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Coby
Beck" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:02:38 GMT, in a place far, far away, "John"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way
as to indicate that:


BBC? For real news?

That's hilarious.

It's as close as we Americans can get currently.

Nonsense.

Yes, there's always Fox News and CNS and Rush Limaugh

Better than the BBC (excluding Limbaugh, which is not a news source).

Fox and TASS, both equally fair and balanced.

Alastair McDonald wrote:

OTOH what about the New York Times? Didn't they deny their report
that the Arctic ice was melting at the North Pole? And their other
report that GWB was a draft dodger? How honest was that?

Ha - that's nothing! Here in Denmark, we have Jyllands-Posten! Maybe not
that strong on scientific issues, but always good for stirring up things ;-)

/steen

"Lloyd Parker" wrote in message ...
ROTFL. Ever watch Faux News? Their idea of "balanced" is someone who
supports Bush and someone who's to the right of Bush.

Or as Steve Colbert asks...

George W. Bush:

Great President? Or GREATEST President?

LOL

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 01:25:48 -0500, "Scott Nudds"
wrote:

After that, all protestations of Rush and Fox News being mouthpieces
for the Right just stank of hypocrisy.

You mean Rush Limbaugh of "smoking does not cause cancer" fame?

That's the idiot, alright. I'm not saying Fox isn't unbiased or that
Limbaugh's not a moronic right-wing mouthpiece. I'm saying that
railing against them is spectacularly hypocritical when those decrying
Fox were conspicuously silent after CNN/Time did its completely and
absurdly bogus Tailwind ("US used nerve gas!!!!") story to headline
their new "investigatvie" news magazine show. I'm fairly certain CNN's
decline and fall can be traced to that event.

Reap what you sow.

Brian

"Brian Thorn" wrote in message ...
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 01:25:48 -0500, "Scott Nudds"
wrote:

After that, all protestations of Rush and Fox News being mouthpieces
for the Right just stank of hypocrisy.

You mean Rush Limbaugh of "smoking does not cause cancer" fame?

That's the idiot, alright. I'm not saying Fox isn't unbiased or that
Limbaugh's not a moronic right-wing mouthpiece. I'm saying that
railing against them is spectacularly hypocritical when those decrying
Fox were conspicuously silent after CNN/Time did its completely and
absurdly bogus Tailwind ("US used nerve gas!!!!") story to headline
their new "investigatvie" news magazine show. I'm fairly certain CNN's
decline and fall can be traced to that event.

Reap what you sow.

Fox isn't a conservative network. In fact you'll rarely see true
conservatives on their news shows, and the ones who do make
an appearance are almost never invited back for a second.
What you will see however is one long, steady stream of Bush
shills and Bush supporters.

Fox isn't about balance or fairness or advancing a conservative
point of view. It's about advancing a very narrow and very
specific radical right agenda that has absolutely nothing to do
with conservatism.

In sci.space.policy Brian Thorn wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 00:14:29 GMT, "John" wrote:

Yes, there's always Fox News and CNS and Rush Limaugh

Ah yes, the Ministry of Propaganda. AKA TBN (The Bush Network).

A direct result of CNN, which at one time at least had the pretext of
impartiality, throwing its reputation in the dumpster with the
ludicrous "Tailwind" story, aka "we don't have a real good story to
launch our new nightly newsmagazine show, so we'll just make one up."

After that, all protestations of Rush and Fox News being mouthpieces
for the Right just stank of hypocrisy.

I don't know any of this stuff, but this kind of discussion happens
often here. Two wrongs don't make one right - can't one say they're
both flawed? It's all about us vs them and mud flinging and the two
party system...