[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
If you’re interested in a more fleshed out, “bigger picture” view of the world media-wise, check out the BBC. They are just as full of shit and propaganda as the rest, but it’s a starting point for you to hear about events, then start your own research.
[/quote]
BBC’s been my homepage for ten years or so. I’m generally more clued in than your average brit but considerably lagging in world affair knowledge compared to some people. My problem is that I read into a subject, and then display an incredible ability to forget absolutely everything I ever researched.
Edit: And before someone lambasts me, I do my research from as many good sources as possible. If there’s one thing I learned with my history degree it was to at least read around a bit.
Carry on - I’m enjoying this discussion. Like I said, I haven’t got anything useful to add, but am interested in what you all have to say.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?[/quote]
Obligated? No.
[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
If you’re interested in a more fleshed out, “bigger picture” view of the world media-wise, check out the BBC. They are just as full of shit and propaganda as the rest, but it’s a starting point for you to hear about events, then start your own research.
[/quote]
BBC’s been my homepage for ten years or so. I’m generally more clued in than your average brit but considerably lagging in world affair knowledge compared to some people. My problem is that I read into a subject, and then display an incredible ability to forget absolutely everything I ever researched.
Edit: And before someone lambasts me, I do my research from as many good sources as possible. If there’s one thing I learned with my history degree it was to at least read around a bit.
Carry on - I’m enjoying this discussion. Like I said, I haven’t got anything useful to add, but am interested in what you all have to say.[/quote]
Sorry…I should have quantified my statement about the BBC with, “If you’re in the US.” US MSM sucks as bad as the BBC, but as mentioned, the Beeb has a wider net so to speak. I often work in Africa, and they usually give me a heads up to do more digging, vs US media reporting on which starlet is flashing her vag for all to see.
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
If you’re interested in a more fleshed out, “bigger picture” view of the world media-wise, check out the BBC. They are just as full of shit and propaganda as the rest, but it’s a starting point for you to hear about events, then start your own research.
[/quote]
BBC’s been my homepage for ten years or so. I’m generally more clued in than your average brit but considerably lagging in world affair knowledge compared to some people. My problem is that I read into a subject, and then display an incredible ability to forget absolutely everything I ever researched.
Edit: And before someone lambasts me, I do my research from as many good sources as possible. If there’s one thing I learned with my history degree it was to at least read around a bit.
Carry on - I’m enjoying this discussion. Like I said, I haven’t got anything useful to add, but am interested in what you all have to say.[/quote]
Sorry…I should have quantified my statement about the BBC with, “If you’re in the US.” US MSM sucks as bad as the BBC, but as mentioned, the Beeb has a wider net so to speak. I often work in Africa, and they usually give me a heads up to do more digging, vs US media reporting on which starlet is flashing her vag for all to see.
[/quote]
I went to the US for a couple of months, and my opinion was that the MSM could be far more partisan than it is over here; not sure if there are the same rules and guidelines there about reporting practices? I was there during the lead up to the presidential elections so perhaps I got an unfair sampling of how ‘passionate’ some of the reporting is.
What online news sources do people use the most?
I would say the BBC is very balanced in fair in its world reporting; not so much on domestic issues and places that we’re bombing the crap out of
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
DIA.
It’s not news because…its Black Africa. News would be, “There were no mass killings in Africa today.”[/quote]
Fixed for you.
Lybia, which is an African country, has been one of the most talked about subjects in the news lately… [/quote]
True.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Unfortuntately, Africa is the doomed continent. Always was, always will be. [/quote]
Also true.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?[/quote]
Obligated? No.[/quote]
Where then does it get the right to interfere with other governments?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?[/quote]
Obligated? No.[/quote]
Where then does it get the right to interfere with other governments?[/quote]
I guess it can strong arm them if it has something to gain from interfering.
Magic,
Freedom of the press is just one of those things about us Yanks. There isn’t too much the govt can do. But, like with private ownership of firearms, I would rather things remain the way they are, than the alternative. The “inconveniences of too much liberty than too litte” and such.
Journalists are held to an oft impossible standard in my opinion. People tend to forget that they are human, and thus subject to their own bias. This is why it’s important to research on ones own, rather than basing opinion off of soundbites from one source.
As for websites, it depends on the person I suppose. I like to cast a wide a net as possible. RSR (Swiss media), ZDF, Deutsche Welle,BBC, Guardian, etc…etc…
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?[/quote]
Obligated? No.[/quote]
Where then does it get the right to interfere with other governments?[/quote]
I guess it can strong arm them if it has something to gain from interfering.[/quote]
But where does their authority come from?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What right does anyone have to butt into the affairs of other nations?[/quote]
No right at all, unless the population of that country wants help.[/quote]
So if they want help does that mean my government via my tax dollars are obligated to help them?[/quote]
Obligated? No.[/quote]
Where then does it get the right to interfere with other governments?[/quote]
I guess it can strong arm them if it has something to gain from interfering.[/quote]
But where does their authority come from?[/quote]
Pff, I don’t know.
Someone is running the show, somewhere.
I’m sure there are groups of presidents that conspire to only look out for their best interests rather the the countries they are running.
Wait, who am I kidding. All presidents are like that.
In a democratically elected government it is impossible to not be like that. The pervading thought is: get it while the gettin is good.
[quote]Lowe-1 wrote:
Magic,
Freedom of the press is just one of those things about us Yanks. There isn’t too much the govt can do. But, like with private ownership of firearms, I would rather things remain the way they are, than the alternative. The “inconveniences of too much liberty than too litte” and such.
Journalists are held to an oft impossible standard in my opinion. People tend to forget that they are human, and thus subject to their own bias. This is why it’s important to research on ones own, rather than basing opinion off of soundbites from one source.
As for websites, it depends on the person I suppose. I like to cast a wide a net as possible. RSR (Swiss media), ZDF, Deutsche Welle,BBC, Guardian, etc…etc…[/quote]
Have never tried RSR or Deutsche Welle. Usually restricted to BBC/Guardian/Times, but I’ll look around.
I agree that journalists CAN be held to too high a standard. At the same time (and I only part agree with my own opinion) I do believe in a media regulator, or some kind of fairness doctrine, so that opinion doesn’t become too polarised. Of course, I also understand the problem with have provisions like that in place.
I guess there’s no easy answer; we’re lucky that we get a degree of freedom to choose our news sources. I used to live in Pakistan; try getting relatively sane and balanced report over there. Some of it is batshit crazy.