WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2024
The New York Times serves a kibosh: Right here, on this very morning, we the people are being offered our choice of stories again.
It all depends on where we turn! At the Fox News site, a giant presentation is offered today beneath these giant headlines:
Former defense official makes earth-shattering UFO revelation as unexplained drones leave millions on edge
Man camping alone in California reported bright, white oval light, completely silent, hovering above trees
In its principal news report, Fox News is offering an "earth-shattering revelation."
On the front page of today's New York Times, a different story is being told about the same general topic:
How Drone Fever Spread Across New Jersey and Beyond
The first sighting was at a military site in New Jersey, then the phenomenon spread into neighboring states. Government assurances that most “drones” were not drones at all have not tamped down curiosity.
Fox News is all in on a huge revelation. On balance, the New York Times is serving a plate of kibosh.
It's all about the so-called "democratization of media!" Thanks to the spread of new media, we all have a special place to go—a place where we'll encounter the types of stories we may prefer to be told.
This very morning, C-Span's Washington Journal asked callers to address this point of concern:
WAYS TO BRIDGE THE POLITICAL DIVIDE
In our view, that will be extremely hard to do as long as very large corporations are earning money, hand over fist, through the anti-journalistic practice known as "segregation by viewpoint."
In our assessment, Fox News is "all in" on this profoundly unhelpful practice. In our view, the Times is also somewhat involved in this way of life, though to a (much) lesser extent.
Finally, this:
As heralded in yesterday's report, Nicholas Kristof's Christmas Eve column generated angry pushback on the Fox News Channel. (Online, his column had appeared on December 21.)
You can watch the video here as Father Gerald Murray tells guest host Raymond Arroyo, "This is all nonsense and garbage...This is an assault on the entire structure of western civilization."
At the Fox News site, the video is accompanied by this dual headline:
New York Times questions virgin birth of Jesus: Christianity is under ‘assault’
Father Gerald Murray joins ‘The Ingraham Angle’ to weigh in on a New York Times article raising questions about the birth of Jesus.
Arroyo's principal post is at EWTN—The Eternal Word Television Network. (There's no reason why it shouldn't be.) As for the work of historian Elaine Pagels, Father Murray offered this:
Her work is "propaganda masquerading as history...All of these historians like Pagels, who try to destroy Christian theology by making it into mythology? No. They are agents and propagandists. They are certainly not historians."
People like Pagels are agents and propagandists for what? Father Murray didn't say. But so it went as Kristof—somewhat clumsily, in our own view—attempted to "bridge the God gap."
We all get to hear our preferred stories now! In what may be a type of disfigured gift, we know where to go to find them.
ReplyDelete"People like Pagels are agents and propagandists for what? Father Murray didn't say."
Huh? You really want to do this, Bob? You enjoy pretending to be dumb? Please.
If, God forbid, this was exactly the same species of anti-Islam shit, you moonbats would've been jumping up and down, raising a huge stink. As if you didn't know.
Pagels is a scholar.
DeleteAlso, billions of people around the planet do not believe the virgin birth story of Jesus.
But guess what? That doesn’t necessarily make them anti-Christian.
DeleteIt's not like billions of people actively disbelieve the virgin birth story and feel compelled to inform everyone about their feeling towards it. No. Billions of people don't care about this story, and in any case, they keep their feeling to themselves. Which is fine.
And again: similarly, billions of people don't care about Prophet Mohammed. But only a few assholes feel like mocking the Prophet publicly.
Who is mocking the virgin birth? Pagels? The New York Times? Any questioning of doctrine is mockery in your view?
DeleteYes. What's the point of this "questioning" if not mockery?
DeleteKnowing the truth and discovering reality are valued by many people, especially academics.
Delete
DeleteThe truth and reality are that you're retarded, Corby.
Value knowing it and enjoy discovering it.
Name-calling on Xmas is a sin.
DeleteI didn't do any name-callings. It was a diagnosis. Yeah, science, bitch.
Delete“Corby” is a name, and you called her “Corby”.
Delete“Corby” too is a diagnosis.
Deleteretard is name-calling
DeleteI am Retard, daughter of Corby.
DeleteMocking disabled people on xmas is exactly what I imagined trolls doing on a holiday like this.
DeleteMy mother is a virgin.
DeleteWho gave birth to triplets; the father, the son, and the holy ghost. But don't you dare make fun or criticize what some Catholic priests drummed up 300 years after the son died. Love our evangelical friends in Utah constantly mocking the mormons. Who determines why your silly story is valid, but the Mormon silly story is BS? Buddhist only religion that makes a tiny bit of sense. When asked about his god the buddha said don't try to imagine the unimaginable. Hindus have had a great workout routine for six thousand years. The abrahamic religions are dirt to me.
DeleteThe Buddhist view of emotion conflicts with findings in emotion research.
DeleteIf I was a Buddhist I would say to be born is a curse. You cannot cope with your certain decline and death and are compensating with too much Yoga, protein shakes, and Botox. But since I came to the conclusion that Buddhism is as silly as any other religion, (other than aliens will save us from nuclear annihilation), I really don't know anything.
DeleteCorby the retard values knowing the truth and discovering reality of her retardation. And so do many others, especially academics.
DeleteYou, 2:43 PM, obviously is not an academic.
"We all get to hear our preferred stories now!"
ReplyDeleteSomerby implies that readers know what stories are going to say, before they actually read them. He seems to be saying that readers choose to read a particular source for the content they will find there, before they actually read those stories. In order to choose a point of view, this must be true. Otherwise a reader can and will encounter unexpected content, even on Fox.
But how does Somerby know that people do not read multiple sources? And if they do that, then they will surely encounter different content, because news sources are not all the same. And if readers do read more than one source, then they must choose which to believe, which they prefer. And that makes it the reader's fault, if they read soggy stories about UFOs masquerading as drones and not stories about drone-testing at New Jersey drone-factories or something more mundane. And if readers found the histrionic Fox coverage too silly, wouldn't they switch to a different channel or read a different paper? That would it make it the readers' fault more than the paper's too.
So, is Somerby complaining because different people read and believe different things? Does he think there should be a single source of info that is compulsory for all, so that we all are on the same page about what we believe? And if Somerby isn't advocating for that, what exactly is his beef?
Somerby has gone on these "diversity is bad" kicks before. He doesn't seem to understand how we can be a diverse society and survive. He seems to be unaware of qualities such as tolerance or even enjoyment of difference. He seems to assume that similarity and commonality are good and diversity is what tears that apart, so it must be minimized as much as possible. He never says how.
I do not want a state news channel with an approved storyline that all must consume and believe. That sounds like 1984 to me. It is the natural conclusion of Somerby's rant today about too much divergence among story writers at news sources. I suspect that Somerby hasn't really thought through this attitude but is just expressing an emotional reaction to being told UFOs may be hovering by Fox while the NY Times says there is nothing to get excited about. I am certain that one of those two papers tried to find out about the drones, and one did not, and I feel confident I know which one. But if right wingers at Fox want to be entertained by stories of space lasers and support their favorite Space Nazi, that is their right under our Constitution and I am OK with that. Somerby apparently is upset by it.
But I believe it is our right to hold opinions, as part of our pursuit of happiness. What does Somerby believe? It amazes me that he can have written today's column in such a way that you get to the end of it and still don't know what Somerby's point is.
It amazes me that you can have read today’s column in such a way that you could get to the end of it and still not know what Somerby’s point is. Somerby’s point is that it will be hard to bridge the political divide as long as corporations make tons of money through viewpoint segregation.
Delete"Somerby has gone on these "diversity is bad" kicks before."
DeleteIt is not diversity that is bad, but segregated viewpoints.
That isn’t what Somerby says.
DeleteThis is self-segregation by viewpoint. The news sources are not enforcing any segregation. Anyone can watch. It is the viewers who choose. There is no mechanism to force people to view anything. If viewpoints were intermixed, viewers would still seek out their preferred stories. So. how does Somerby propose to eliminate that choice?
Delete"I feel confident I know which one'
DeleteYes, that's exactly Bobs point.
I don't know what Bob's point is, but it is not my fault that Rupert Murdoch runs a hack shop for RW propagandists.
Delete“ New York Times questions virgin birth of Jesus”
ReplyDeleteDiC, as a Jew, would you care to weigh on the “virgin birth” theory?
I’d like to hear from Cecelia, too.
DeleteOK @11:14. IMO attacking Christian beliefs on Christms is ugly and stupid, even though I am an atheist. I think Christianity does a lot more good than harm.
DeleteSo, David, I think you agree with me: the virgin birth of Jesus did not occur.
DeleteI got a good whooping from mom when they tossed me out of Sunday School for complaining that the stories were stupid and made no sense. Plus the special effects were weak.
DeleteThe NYT can’t help themselves. It’s Christmas and they’re always going to try and rain on the Christmas parade. Same at Easter. Never at Ramadan.
DeleteI don’t remember getting a lot of baby dolls as a kid. I did go for Barbies, as did my daughter.. Ken needed a bit of butching up. I’m a big fan of toxic masculinity. .
But Cecilia, what about virgin birth?
DeleteAre you a fan of domestic violence too?
DeleteAnonymouse 4:59pm, I don’t associate violence with masculinity. It’s the opposite of it.
DeleteWhat do you think toxic masculinity means. It is as if you said you like it just to irritate libs but violence is part of it.
DeleteI’m masculine and I’m violent.
DeleteActually, toxic masculinity, as defined by the people who use the term, is any man who pees standing up.
DeleteAnonymouse 7:32pm, as is the case for many women like you.
DeleteDavid in Cal, indigenous people across the globe would like a word with you, you close minded silly boy. Blacks and native people in the USA as well. But Hitler did the Jews a solid, and was he really Christian?, or just pandering to Christians to murder the Jews by the millions? Or was that another lib hoax? So much good, what did you expect the Spanish inquisition?
DeleteHitler abandoned Christianity. He wanted National Socialism to replace it as the country's religion. Wiki says:
Delete"Most historians describe his [Hitler's] later posture as adversarial to organized Christianity and established Christian denominations."
Leaders of various churches in Germany resisted Hitler’s acts. Others collaborated with him and then helped Nazis escape by hiding and transporting them after Hitler’s fall and during Allied occupation.
DeleteThose who supported Hitler and helped Nazis were examples of toxic Christianity.
DeleteAnd what about the others who opposed Hitler, some of whom died in camps themselves?
DeleteIMO a focus on indigenousness is just another form of racism. I reject the idea that people whose ancestors lived somewhere for a period of time are superior to or more deserving than people whose ancestors lived there for a shorter period of time. I reject the idea that whites in America are superior to Chinese-Americans because Chinese weren’t here as long. I reject the idea that Chinese-Americans are more deserving or superior to Vietnamese-Americans. Every human being is an individual who should be respected.
DeleteTalking about western Christian nations massive genocide, slave trade, and work to destroy native cultural institutions jenious Dave. Even to the point of Canada and the USA, after not completing total genocide, shipped remaining native kids to "schools" to lose their language and customs and bury a few thousands here and there for not behaving. And that is just North America. Look around Dave, it happened globally. Western Christian nations were good at creating destructive technologies, and sick enough to deploy all off them. I send thee to the rack you dirty atheist Jew.
DeleteI reject the idea that diaspora Jews have a right to eject Palestinians from the West Bank.
DeleteHitler abandoned Christianity.
DeleteI don't know if Hitler was ever a true Christian - he wasn't - , but Christianity never abandoned Hitler.
Roman soldiers were the solid foundation of Western Civilization. They were not rapists.
ReplyDeleteSomerby calling religious dogma “preferred stories” is no less disrespectful than anything the historian said. Pooping on other people’s religious beliefs on Christmas isn’t nice no matter who does it, including Somerby.
Delete