News:

Today, for a brief second, I thought of a life without Roger. It was much like my current life, except that this forum was a bit nicer.

Main Menu

Appearently we have state media in the US now

Started by Banned User 1, February 21, 2014, 02:44:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

Banned User 1

February 21, 2014, 02:44:56 AM
Figured this would be interesting for you all; found this somewhere and I'm just sort of forwarding it, but anyway....

Quote
>The Obama Administration's Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is poised to place government monitors in newsrooms across the country in an absurdly draconian attempt to intimidate and control the media.

>FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai reveals a brand new Obama Administration program that he fears could be used in "pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories."

>As Commissioner Pai explains in the Wall Street Journal:

>Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs," or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.

>The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations."

http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/why-is-obama-administration-putting-government-monitors-in-newsrooms

Protip: To read the firewalled story in the WSJ, type 'The FCC Wades Into the Newsroom' into Google, then click on the first link that comes up. Presumably this is because the Wall Street Journal welcomes random hits on its web site, but thinks that charging you at the ass will make you stay. Anyway. Enjoy your daily dose of Chocolate Nixon's shenanigans.

If this is legit, I'm pretty speechless...

Nephew Twiddleton

#1
February 21, 2014, 02:47:25 AM
Before I read this, what is your source of this quote?
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

The Good Reverend Roger

#2
February 21, 2014, 02:48:22 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 02:47:25 AM
Before I read this, what is your source of this quote?

Link is in his post.

Their other stories involve prayer and abortion.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Nephew Twiddleton

#3
February 21, 2014, 02:49:16 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 02:48:22 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 02:47:25 AM
Before I read this, what is your source of this quote?

Link is in his post.

Their other stories involve prayer and abortion.

I was wondering more about the quote itself, but apparently I don't have to worry about it.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

Banned User 1

#4
February 21, 2014, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 02:48:22 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 02:47:25 AM
Before I read this, what is your source of this quote?

Link is in his post.

Their other stories involve prayer and abortion.


ah, the included link is definitely from a pretty derped-up site. The WSJ article is legit, though:

>http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579366903828260732

Sorry, I pulled the OP quote off of some chan's news board without pruning it too much...groggy as fuck right now, but yeah. Follow the advice in the "protip"...it looks like most of the information originates from Wall street journal.

Nephew Twiddleton

#5
February 21, 2014, 02:53:40 AM
Quote from: von on February 21, 2014, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 02:48:22 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 02:47:25 AM
Before I read this, what is your source of this quote?

Link is in his post.

Their other stories involve prayer and abortion.


ah, the included link is definitely from a pretty derped-up site. The WSJ article is legit, though:

>http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579366903828260732

Sorry, I pulled the OP quote off of some chan's news board without pruning it too much...groggy as fuck right now, but yeah. Follow the advice in the "protip"...it looks like most of the information originates from Wall street journal.

Not exactly a paragon of unbiased information.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

Nephew Twiddleton

#6
February 21, 2014, 02:55:25 AM
Also, might help you to always include the source of your quote. I didn't even see the protip because, like I mentioned, I didn't bother reading the quote.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

The Good Reverend Roger

#7
February 21, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch organ. 

Not saying it's not legit, but at the moment it has about as much credibility as a Rush Limbaugh rant.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Nephew Twiddleton

#8
February 21, 2014, 03:15:17 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch organ. 

Not saying it's not legit, but at the moment it has about as much credibility as a Rush Limbaugh rant.

Pretty much this. You don't want to see how abysmal the calculation for the percentage of a day that a broken clock is right, you start getting into quantum mechanics kind of numbers.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

Banned User 1

#9
February 21, 2014, 03:15:41 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch organ. 

Not saying it's not legit, but at the moment it has about as much credibility as a Rush Limbaugh rant.

Yeah, and I'm thinking that your critique of that point holds water too...

like I said, I saw this as my first "checking the news today" thing right after waking up, so I kinda knee jerked on it...

anyway, ALL sources I can find that use similar language to the WSJ article are either Murdoch-owned (fox, wsj), independant sites that would appear to have a vested interest in shaming the current administration, or russia today...and they would be critical of america just to be critical, so yeah.

I'll keep my eyes on this, but you may be right about shit being iffy...

rong

#10
February 21, 2014, 04:17:28 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 03:15:17 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch organ. 

Not saying it's not legit, but at the moment it has about as much credibility as a Rush Limbaugh rant.

Pretty much this. You don't want to see how abysmal the calculation for the percentage of a day that a broken clock is right, you start getting into quantum mechanics kind of numbers.

1.2478148e-46% ?   
"a real smart feller, he felt smart"

Nephew Twiddleton

#11
February 21, 2014, 04:22:19 AM
Quote from: rong on February 21, 2014, 04:17:28 AM
Quote from: THE PHYTOPHTHORATIC HOLDER OF THE ADVANCED DEGREE on February 21, 2014, 03:15:17 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 21, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch organ. 

Not saying it's not legit, but at the moment it has about as much credibility as a Rush Limbaugh rant.

Pretty much this. You don't want to see how abysmal the calculation for the percentage of a day that a broken clock is right, you start getting into quantum mechanics kind of numbers.

1.2478148e-46% ?

I got 2.314814815E-5

2 divided by 24, divided by 60, divided by 60.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

Nephew Twiddleton

#12
February 21, 2014, 04:26:28 AM
I figured the calculation was right twice in a 24 hour period, one sixtieth of that for minutes and one sixtieth of that for seconds. I may have set it up wrong.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

rong

#13
February 21, 2014, 09:28:18 AM Last Edit: February 21, 2014, 09:39:52 AM by rong
I went by planck time

24 hrs = 1.602801935e+45 Planck time

2/1.602801935e+45=1.2478148e-45

1.2478148e-45*100%=1.2478148e-45%

Looks like I goofed the first time.
"a real smart feller, he felt smart"

Cain

#14
February 21, 2014, 09:59:26 AM
Particpation is voluntary.  The FCC is required by its statute to study how media companies operate. There was no mention of the FCC having control over any process, only studying how companies who chose to take part selected their news and by what processes.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions