Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

jjohn (22)

jjohn
  (email not shown publicly)
http://taskboy.com/
AOL IM: taskboy3000 (Add Buddy, Send Message)

Perl hack/Linux buff/OSS junkie.

Journal of jjohn (22)

Tuesday August 05, 2003
07:56 AM

Shame! Shame!

[ #13917 ]

« There is a fundamental problem with the BBC and all public broadcasting enterprises. They are magnets for anti- traditionalist, leftist staffers who fondle their ideals over the air, knowing they are in a business far removed from the disgusting commercialism of their competitors. Their revenue is carved directly out of the public's hide. »

--Tampa Tribune: The BBC in The Dock

The core thesis of this article is that public funding shouldn't support Left wing opinions. This old saw of an argument is frequently used against the PBS in the US and against funding public art. It's amazing how intolerant some people are of dissent. Recall that there have been many nations who carefully reviewed and approved each piece of public art to ensure none of it offended.

Nazi Germany was one such country, as was the Soviet Union.

It's funny how the media clings to the idea of objectivity when no one can agree on what objective reporting is. As Jon Steward recently pointed out in his interview with Bill Moyers, editors make subjective decisions about the order of new stories. Those that are deemed "important" are presented first. Yet even a casual review of any news outlet will should that importance is frequently defined as that outlet's self-interest rather than an obligation to some "public trust." This article here is clearly labelled an editorial written by a "conservative" who task the BBC to task for criticising Blair during the 2003 Iraq war. It's wonderful to read this article as it portrays opposition to an administration's policy as a "menace" and a "propaganda outlet for peaceniks". It's jolting to see Cold War rhetoric applied to any news paper let alone the BBC.

This is a funny time to be alive on Earth. With many countries of the West becoming uncomfortable Right wing, one has to wonder where we are heading a such a fast pace? Why is it so wrong to question is the destination is worth the trip?

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • The core thesis of this article is that public funding shouldn't support Left wing opinions. This old saw of an argument is frequently used against the PBS in the US and against funding public art. It's amazing how intolerant some people are of dissent.

    Public federal funding should not support ANY opinions. There's nothing in the Constitution about funding opinions, or art. Funding it is blatantly unconstitutional, as Amendment X says the federal government can only do what the Constitution specifically

  • Of course, there is no such thing as pure objectivity. However, that does not mean objectivity should not be a goal. It very much should be. You shouldn't call someone a "noob" in a news story, even if he is a noob.

    Practically speaking, objectivity helps the reporter do a better job. The link is broken, but this weekend George Will detailed [go.com] how a single reporter for the New York times, for many years, has been writing the same story over and over again, that "despite" a drop in crime, the prison popula
    • Please continue to argue with yourself, Pudge. You're doing a bang up job!

      I want the government to foster intelligent discourse. I'm not a laywer, I have no idea what the Consitution means legally (I understand the words, but I don't understand law). I won't hold the Consitution in higher regard than Thomas "Every generation needs a revolution" Jefferson. I do know what sort of society I want to live in and the sort of activities I want my government sponsoring (I think my blog gives some idea what pr

      • I want the government to foster intelligent discourse.

        I want no such thing. That requires my money, and if it is federally funded, it requires violating the Constitution.

        I don't think objectivity in the professional media is possible and perhaps the pursuit of this illusion is worse than admitting it doesn't exist.

        It's necessary, if you want to inform people rather than attempt to sway them. If you think Fox News is right about how news should be reported -- starting from a philosophy and shoehornin