Day of Rage

[Triple Zero]

i'm having an off week. i should retreat back to not posting for another few months and try again later.

and I was being a bit more cranky than necessary, sorry.

also, i thought the lulzsec bank hack data they never released? and the leaks they have thrown out weren't game changing, which is what i was referring to.

dunno what they didn't release. but they did release several gigabytes of data and emails. and I'm pretty sure not even 5% of that shit has been analyzed further than a few searches for choice keywords.

that's the difference. Wikileaks made a deal with news agencies, they would get the data if they'd do the research on it. Wikileaks did part of the research themselves as well.

LulzSec just dumped the data out there. That's not enough. I mean, think about it, all the info is already out there, even without the leaks we knew about the corruption, if you just look and connect the dots (or read Cain's write-ups of him connecting the dots), but that doesn't bring anything to attention of the world, right?
So now there's even more proof and more damning stuff out there, but if nobody writes about it, and if nobody investigates it further to see what it really means, it's just there.

So, once more, you can't skimp on doing proper journalistic research. We need more, and better journalists, we need a fucking army of Spider Jerusalems.

[East Coast Hustle]

Yep.  People are being cranky that the protest wasn't reported.


http://www.politicususa.com/en/media-blackout-us-day-of-rage

HAHAHA!

Dumbfucks.  What the hell were they expecting.

I swear to God, this fucking country is RETARDED.  It's like everyone married their first cousin, or drank while pregnant or some shit.

I checked the news here.

3 big newspapers ignored it. One big mainstream news website and the public TV news broadcasting website both did report it. Not very in-depth or anything, but it was mentioned.

When I see that photo, I kinda get the feeling of a nation that's pretty much forgotten how to work up a proper RAGE and ... well, they're trying, going through the movements, seeing if maybe it'll come back to them, you know?

Sorry but isn't dumping or laughing at these people just as bad as when some disagreed with the "perry/gay" campaign? I mean sure, it's not as sharp and doesn't carry a punch like your ideas, but at least these people are doing something, right? They're not just posting about it on a website, but they actually printed off a huge banner (which indeed is laughably bad) and went onto the streets.
So what if they forgot how to do a proper protest? Should you laugh at them for being pathetic or should you encourage them, cheer them on, see if they can take yet another step to proper real rage?

And one thing, maybe it doesn't do *much*, this RL protest, but I walked around on Wall Street this summer, and there's Important People With Expensive Suits And Expensive Watches walking around all over the place. If you actually get a crowd there and have them chant some vaguely threatening things (free speech, right? "EAT THE RICH! EAT THE RICH! EAT THE RICH!") would make them pretty damn uncomfortable, no?

Y'know, I'm actually inclined to agree with this post. I'm still gonna laugh my ass off at the pathetic and ineffectual hippies and their "day of rage", but I see where you're coming from and I agree in principle.

It's just that I'm frequently willing to ignore my principles.

[Triple Zero]

Definitely not going to stand in the way of someone who wants to have a good laugh because I too see where you're coming from and agree in principle

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yep.  People are being cranky that the protest wasn't reported.


http://www.politicususa.com/en/media-blackout-us-day-of-rage

HAHAHA!

Dumbfucks.  What the hell were they expecting.

I swear to God, this fucking country is RETARDED.  It's like everyone married their first cousin, or drank while pregnant or some shit.

All of the above, plus a nasty infection.

[Doktor Howl]

So, once more, you can't skimp on doing proper journalistic research. We need more, and better journalists, we need a fucking army of Spider Jerusalems.

Ed Murrow's dead, Trip.

We'll have to settle for whatever blow-dried talking head they prop up in front of a camera.

[Luna]

So, once more, you can't skimp on doing proper journalistic research. We need more, and better journalists, we need a fucking army of Spider Jerusalems.

Ed Murrow's dead, Trip.

We'll have to settle for whatever blow-dried talking head they prop up in front of a camera.

When one of the best news sources on TV is a comedy show, we are all fucked.

[Elder Iptuous]

So, once more, you can't skimp on doing proper journalistic research. We need more, and better journalists, we need a fucking army of Spider Jerusalems.

Ed Murrow's dead, Trip.

We'll have to settle for whatever blow-dried talking head they prop up in front of a camera.

When one of the best news sources on TV is a comedy show, we are all fucked.

This is a sentiment that i've seen repeated quite a bit, but i don't quite understand why this isn't greeted with open arms.
especially here.
i think that dipping the news in humor is a fantastic development...

[Triple Zero]

Because the Daily Show isn't actually supposed to be a news show. They're a comedy show that happen to do their research well enough that they're better than the average news show which doesn't.

Nothing wrong with bringing the news as humour, it's a cool idea, but the goal of the Daily Show is still to entertain.

Nobody's actually dipping the news in humour. It's just that a current-events entertainment show necessarily has chunks of news in it, and these chunks happen to be better researched than your mainstream news shows.

It's like that something-window for left/right politics, except for journalism. Your news has gotten so bad that even a current-events comedy show does a better job at portraying it insightfully.

It's not like the Daily Show stepped in and said, okay we're going to bring proper researched news and then dip it in humour for good measure!

[Cramulus]

yes -- Daily Show is NOT news. It's commentary on news. And the commentary is often more insightful than the news itself. But its intent is different - it plays a different role than actual journalism. They have freedoms that news shows don't have. And they accomplish different things than journalists do.

[Elder Iptuous]

agree with both of you, but i don't know how clean the delineation is.

[Doktor Howl]

yes -- Daily Show is NOT news. It's commentary on news. And the commentary is often more insightful than the news itself. But its intent is different - it plays a different role than actual journalism. They have freedoms that news shows don't have. And they accomplish different things than journalists do.

*points at my sig*

[Triple Zero]

agree with both of you, but i don't know how clean the delineation is.

either I don't understand what you're trying to say here,

or the fact that you don't know says more about the quality of your news than the cleanliness of the delineation.

[Elder Iptuous]

agree with both of you, but i don't know how clean the delineation is.

either I don't understand what you're trying to say here,

or the fact that you don't know says more about the quality of your news than the cleanliness of the delineation.

perhaps you are right on the second point. 
What i mean to say is that, despite intentions, the daily show does, in fact, tell you what the news stories of the day are.  they are not doing the investigation themselves, so it can't be counted as real journalism, but it does present the current news stories in circulation.
the 'serious' news, on the other hand, seem to editorialize enough that they almost seem to meet in the middle.

I don't trust either to provide an accurate assessment of whatever the current situation is, i guess.

...perhaps you are right on the second point. 

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

So, once more, you can't skimp on doing proper journalistic research. We need more, and better journalists, we need a fucking army of Spider Jerusalems.

Ed Murrow's dead, Trip.

We'll have to settle for whatever blow-dried talking head they prop up in front of a camera.

When one of the best news sources on TV is a comedy show, we are all fucked.

This is a sentiment that i've seen repeated quite a bit, but i don't quite understand why this isn't greeted with open arms.
especially here.
i think that dipping the news in humor is a fantastic development...

The reason I would say we're all fucked, is because the big news agencies that most people trust don't deliver anything remotely resembling news, and a comedy show that really doesn't do anything but mock the big news agencies and public figures is more informative.

[Elder Iptuous]

It seems to me that the daily show does do more than just mock the big news shows.
if you watch the daily show, and your buddy watches a 'real' news show, and you meet up at the water cooler the next day, you'll both know about the story of the day.  you just happen to have had a joke delivered with it as well.
What you are describing is more like the Onion, right?
so, i understand what you are saying, but i think the DS is providing a news service that can editorialize as a counter to the other news services while protected behind a shield of humor.  They can tell a story about something and lambaste the spin that is being put out by, for example, Fox, and people will absorb it with a laugh that would otherwise shun another view of it.  I can see this directly with friends and family.
So, it's telling the story of the day and it's putting out alternate interpretations through humor.  That seems to me to be increasing the 'for real' newsiness of the system as a whole. 

perhaps my view is based in part on the fact that i don't think 'pure journalism' without some kind of inherent editorializing is possible.

also, i have been known to be an idiot, too.  so there's that...