Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] last days

["Christian M. Cepel" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Just for clarification, this particular part of the thread was all 
Vern.  Just wanted to save you from having to type Vern or Christian 
each time.

Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> Mike Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> >
> > > Mike Miller wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bias should also be considered by how the matter is presented 
> > > > > contextually.  Furthermore the tone (e.g. "experts" as opposed to 
> > > > > "supposed experts") plays a very significant role.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Maybe you can show me a published example of the use of "supposed 
> > > > experts" or "so-called experts."
> > >
> > >
> > > Or then again, maybe I can't.
> > >
> > > What's your point?
> >
> >
> >
> > That you and someone else (Vern or Christian), and many other 
> > Christian fundamentalist conservatives, are constantly complaining 
> > about bias in the news media.  These claims of bias usually come as 
> > attacks on entire sources of news, like the top US newspapers or an 
> > entire broadcasting network.  It's almost always presented as "I felt 
> > they were biased" and this then leads, always or almost always, to 
> > the conclusion that we should not get our news from those sources.
> >
> > Today I'm being told by you and someone else (either Vern or 
> > Christian) that some of our finest papers are using terms like 
> > "supposed experts" and "so-called experts" to dismiss legitimate 
> > experts out of hand, or to taint the claims of these experts.  I am 
> > skeptical that this is happening so I am asking you to tell me where 
> > you've seen it.  I read these papers all the time, but I do mostly 
> > focus on science news, but I never see this kind of thing.
>
> Yes, I was getting my example from Vern or Christian.  You found my 
> source precisely.  Well done.
>
> Why don't you ask whoever it was for their source?
>
> I used it as an illustration of the kinds of things that could be 
> done, and I think in context was clearly not meant as an actual example.
>
> Now if your question is about "this sort of thing", I am somewhat sure 
> that I have given examples of this sort of thing before, and I'm sure 
> that I'll see it again.  Next time I'm reading the Guardian I'll see 
> some more (because they go for this kind of thing big time) and I'll 
> hopefully remember to pass it on to this group.
>
> (Incidently I'm not saying the right wing press doesn't do it either.)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion