Something that pissed me off

[Guest Some Guy]

A few days a sgo an woman in boston sliced the throats of her 2 young children (6 and 3 years old) killing them and turned the knife on herself. A utility worker saw the them lying in the basemant and called the cops. The Police showed up and the woman who was bleeding but not dead tried to attack them with the knife that she had just murdered her children with. So naturally three cops unloaded on her and killed her.

The headline on the front page of the Globe read,

"2 Children Slain in Home;

mother killed by police"

 

To me this is misleading as to what happened, it almost implies that the cops were in the wrong. The headline should have read,

"Mother kills her children;

attacks police and is killed"

 

This is a double murderer and she gets off clean in the headline. Then the article goes on to speculate about the women's mental stability, further taking the blame for killing her children off of her.

 

This just pissed me off.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

The police in Minneapolis were forced to kill a Somalian who was waving a machette. The Somalian community was up in arms saying the man couldn't speak english, but police recordings showed that he could speak english and had previously sent terrorist threats. Naturally the Minneapolis Red Star was critical of the police, but not the Somalians, who made things up.

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

Liberals will be swarming but... more liberal media bias.

 

No one can possibly be responsible for their own actions. </sarcasm>

[Guest dreamer420]

that headline is somewhat misleading and you are right that the paper should have been more careful in print that one. i learned not to do that kind of stuff back in high school journalism.

[Guest DrEvil]

Along the same lines, I hate when newspapers say something like "Cops kill father of eight". Right from the headline they're victimizing the assailant and his poor family and criminalizing the police.

 

You read the story and see that the police have arrived after three people were shot dead by the assailant, they attempted to subdue him with words, pepper spray and force, and finally shot him after he began shooting and made every effort to revive him after the situation was brought under control. But no, the headline "these trigger happy racist pigs shot a defenceless man leaving his litter to fend for itself without (such a great role model of) a father."

[Guest EricMM]

I wouldn't say it's leftist, I would just say it's sensationalism. It's selling newspapers. Many many people see police as The Man, or something to be feared not admired. I know none of my friends enjoy being passed by a cop on the highway, because we don't feel protected by the police most of the time, we feel harrassed or threatened. If someone says the police did something wrong, people will buy papers to find out about it.

 

-Eric

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Minneapolis Red Star"

 

Cute

 

I remember years ago in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette some bleeding heart started her story about a woman going to jail by saying that her two young children won't see their mom for the next 10(?) years.

 

The reason?

 

Several paragraphs later you learn that the bitch threw ACID on people and left them disfigured.

 

Being a journalism grad I get sick whenever I see the antics of Big Media

[Guest phoenixrising]

Reminds me of Mick Foley's phrase in Foley Is Good.."(insert thing here) is faker than pro wrestling." Can't recall if he did say that the media is faker than pro wrestling, but that statement would be correct.

 

Sadly, the headlines are put there because of the shock factor the media likes to use rather than a sloppy editor who missed something. Just as sad, it works, because people are either too stupid or more likely too busy to read the entire article. Many times I've read an article because of the headline (yes I am guilty of it) only to wonder by the end why the headline was worded the way it was.

[Guest Some Guy]

It pissed me off because many people onr read the headlines. They think that the "Man" killed another "inocent victim" and go on to further hate the police. I'm no huge fan of cops, but they are constantly accused (out rightly or by implication) of wrong doing even when they did nothing wrong. That bothers me.

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

It basically comes down to this: people are dumb and want short, easy to follow headlines that jump out at them or they will not be interested. Sure, more detailed stuff (like NY Times) also sells but that's largely because of the paper's reputation rather than 36 point fonts. I generally avoid TV and print media and get news from the internet where I can filter out editorial content and don't have to listen to pompous self-absorbed jackasses.

[Guest bob_barron]

As someone whose going to journalism school headlines like that disturb me and piss me off.

 

Police do a lot of great things but except for 9/11 you don't really hear about it.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"As someone whose going to journalism school headlines like that disturb me and piss me off."

 

Back in school I did this project regarding why the media is "biased," and one of my examples was the headline. This was in '95 so the "cutting" of the federal school lunch program was all the rave. I held up two headlines to my class and asked them which one they'd be more likely to pick up...

 

Congress to reduce rate of spending increases for school lunches

 

Clinton to Newt: Stop starving kids

 

Of course the class picked the second one, and my feminazi teacher threw a fit with a few other examples I used later -- one of them, incidentially, was the story I posted earlier when I called this lady, who was someone my teacher knew, an idiot.

[Guest bob_barron]

The second headline sells more papers.

 

The first one causes people to yawn.

 

Sad isn't it

[Guest Some Guy]

The second one is also dishonest and typical of Leftists, "All the GOP are rich, racist, elitist assholes who want to starve children, declare nuclear war, and kill the poor." Those constant implications are such utter bullshit and slanderous. That second hedline would make me *LESS* likely to buy the paper.

[Guest EricMM]

Some Guy you do a disservice to Conservatives everywhere. I try to find good in everyone even bastards like drtom, but you need to stop using the phrase "typical of Leftists" it just sounds so dirty when you say it.

 

There are some Conservatives I think are rich, elitist assholes. I think a few are in favor of things I wouldn't approve of. But not all, or most. And what if Newt WAS doing that? There are some _DUMB_ _ASS_ _DEMOCRATS_ out there who I would never support. Can't you believe that there are some liberals who are better than some conservatives?

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

And what if Newt WAS doing that?

Oh, COME ON!!

 

Can't you believe that there are some liberals who are better than some conservatives?

IF they exist, you'd be hardpressed to find them.

[Guest EricMM]

LOL I didn't mean that Newt was probably starving children, but if Newt DID do something wrong, would Some Guy call him on it or defend him?

Not that there aren't admirable traits in either course of action tho

IF they exist, you'd be hardpressed to find them.

Thats so wrong, you're saying that smart people tend to be conservative and dumb people Liberal? Really? I tend to think it's all a matter of how you were brought up

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

Thats so wrong, you're saying that smart people tend to be conservative and dumb people Liberal?

I'm saying, as it is a common trait for a liberal to be much more vocal than a conservative, the dumb liberals are much more prominent than the dumb conservatives.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

IMO, many times a liberal will use emotion to push their point of view while a conservative will tend to rely on fact and figures. Now granted this doesn't ALWAYS play out this way, (look at the abortion debate, for example) but it's an interesting way of looking at things whenever Congress is going at an issue.

 

Lib: If the give-more-money-to-the-swampmoth-studies-bill isn't passed, children will die!

 

Con: If this bill is passed, taxpayers will get hosed

 

Lib: You hate children!

 

Con: No I don't

 

etc.

[Guest NoCalMike]

<<<<IMO, many times a liberal will use emotion to push their point of view while a conservative will tend to rely on fact and figures. Now granted this doesn't ALWAYS play out this way, (look at the abortion debate, for example) but it's an interesting way of looking at things whenever Congress is going at an issue.>>>>

 

Facts and Figures eh? yah like the hundreds "scandals" everyone tried to throw at Clinton that amounted to a hill of beans.......

[Guest NoCalMike]

<<<I'm saying, as it is a common trait for a liberal to be much more vocal than a conservative, the dumb liberals are much more prominent than the dumb conservatives.>>>>

 

Well how about voting to put NEITHER in office....we had a dumb president in Clinton and an even more dumb president in Bush, so why are the majority of people putting these guys in office?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I take it you're a Rhodes Scholar and a graduate of an Ivy League university?

[Guest NoCalMike]

<<<I take it you're a Rhodes Scholar and a graduate of an Ivy League university? >>>

 

 

Well, Yes, Yes I am, graduated from Dartmouth last year...........just kidding, yet I must laugh at my grammar from my last post, "more dumb"

 

My comment was just based on the fact that I know lots of people that voted for Bush/Gore and afterwards none really seemed that impressed by them, so I am just wondering then WHY vote for them? People just seem eager to jump on one of the bandwagons and go for the ride.

[Guest Some Guy]

While I like Newt Gingrich, I find the fact that he cheated on his wife to be repugnent. If you make a promise to someone you should keep it. I have been critical of the current President as well. I didn't like the tarriffs he placed on some trade products. He said in his campaign that he was for free trade and then cantradicted himself.

My problem with many (not all) Leftists is that all they have to argue with is emotion, then convince themselves that everyone who disagrees with them are evil, white, elitist, stupid, racists and summarily disregard anything they say based on those ridiculua notions.

[Guest EricMM]

You forgot greedy

[Guest Some Guy]

My bad.

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

Runs both ways though. Which one of these would sell more papers?:

 

1. Presidency too close to call, Dewey holds razor-thin lead that could change at any moment

 

2. DEWEY BEATS TRUMAN

 

Of course, we all know how that one turned out

[Guest NoCalMike]

<<<My problem with many (not all) Leftists is that all they have to argue with is emotion, then convince themselves that everyone who disagrees with them are evil, white, elitist, stupid, racists and summarily disregard anything they say based on those ridiculua notions. >>>

 

Well, I would say that statement is taking it a little to far, but as far as Bush is concerned, I have a little bit of a hard time with people in office making decisions for the working class, that have probobaly never had to work a day in their life and/or never had the same pressures as lower-middle class workers.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

<<<<IMO, many times a liberal will use emotion to push their point of view while a conservative will tend to rely on fact and figures. Now granted this doesn't ALWAYS play out this way, (look at the abortion debate, for example) but it's an interesting way of looking at things whenever Congress is going at an issue.>>>>

 

Facts and Figures eh? yah like the hundreds "scandals" everyone tried to throw at Clinton that amounted to a hill of beans.......

 

 

 

Uh, I wasn't referring to Clinton scandals -- just ordinary Capitol Hill debates.

[Guest Some Guy]

Runs both ways though. Which one of these would sell more papers?:

 

1. Presidency too close to call, Dewey holds razor-thin lead that could change at any moment

 

2. DEWEY BEATS TRUMAN

 

Of course, we all know how that one turned out

I'd say the first one because it gives you a reason to read teh story, if it says, "DEWEY BEATS TRUMAN" what's their to read about, you already know what happened or in this case what didn't happen.

 

 

NoCalMike, did you vote for Gore? Would you vote foe Ted Kennedy in you lived in MA? Those 2 and countless other Dems have never had to work a day in their lives either, but people believe them when they say they want to help the middle class. Why is that?