Of course none of them are--though they aren't as liberal as anyone would have you believe.
And as for my anonymous poster--I'm guessing you aren't leaning to the left of the fence. I liken the need to advertise to me that your reporting is "fair and balanced" to that of men who have to tell me how wonderful their exes think they are in bed. Frankly, if you were all that great, you wouldn't have to tell me.
Jay, don't get too defensive. I kind of disagree with you. If you are a teacher, then YOU shouldn't have to disprove others' comments regarding slang. Also, OTHERS shouldn't have to prove their proficiency if they're pointing out yours. By default, if they've spotted your mistake, then they are proving their skills.
Think about it.
In any case, this is about news sources. Only AP/Reuters really are valid, nowadays. They use myriad stringers and only offer straight-up, hardcore news. Not comment or slant.
You're right...the original post was related to news sources (and I'd frankly prefer comments relate to the original posts content not language or form).
AP and Reuters ARE the only ones out there that are as close to unbiased as a news source can get. I watch the local stuff and CNN or CBS and occasionally I turn on NPR on the way to work. That's what's available to me for the quick and dirty reporting (it's a phrase, guys, not a commentary on the reporters/news sources). When I want the full/real story, I hit the 'Net and shoot straight for the AP.
Mar 28, 2005, 3:21:00 PM
Ha! None of them are--unless they're quoting AP or Reuters.
Mar 28, 2005, 7:57:00 PM
And I SOOO disagree with you - what would you prefer? CNN? CBS? NPR? Maybe you ought to let them quote Ward Churchill.
Fox is the CLOSEST thing out there that is indeed fair and balanced.
Mar 28, 2005, 11:42:00 PM
Of course none of them are--though they aren't as liberal as anyone would have you believe.
And as for my anonymous poster--I'm guessing you aren't leaning to the left of the fence. I liken the need to advertise to me that your reporting is "fair and balanced" to that of men who have to tell me how wonderful their exes think they are in bed. Frankly, if you were all that great, you wouldn't have to tell me.
Mar 30, 2005, 8:41:00 AM
Jay, don't get too defensive. I kind of disagree with you. If you are a teacher, then YOU shouldn't have to disprove others' comments regarding slang. Also, OTHERS shouldn't have to prove their proficiency if they're pointing out yours. By default, if they've spotted your mistake, then they are proving their skills.
Think about it.
In any case, this is about news sources. Only AP/Reuters really are valid, nowadays. They use myriad stringers and only offer straight-up, hardcore news. Not comment or slant.
Mar 30, 2005, 9:25:00 AM
You're right...the original post was related to news sources (and I'd frankly prefer comments relate to the original posts content not language or form).
AP and Reuters ARE the only ones out there that are as close to unbiased as a news source can get. I watch the local stuff and CNN or CBS and occasionally I turn on NPR on the way to work. That's what's available to me for the quick and dirty reporting (it's a phrase, guys, not a commentary on the reporters/news sources). When I want the full/real story, I hit the 'Net and shoot straight for the AP.
Mar 30, 2005, 3:40:00 PM
Typical. Those who can't, teach. Good job on forcing your agenda down the throats of your students under the guise of "reliable sourcing".
Mar 30, 2005, 9:19:00 PM
Thank you, Glod. I appreciate your comments.
As for the comment left by Matthew, I'd like to amend your thoughts about teaching. It should read:
"Those who can't, fuck things up for the rest of us because they didn't listen to those who taught."