Ahh Incorrect IMO.
I find the NYT to be very free of subjective bias in their journalism. I rank them up there with BBC, AP, Reuters and our own CBC News.
General / Off-Topic Germany, Netherlands and Switzerland vs Turkey
- Thread starter Patrick_68000
- Start date
Ahh Incorrect IMO.
I find the NYT to be very free of subjective bias in their journalism. I rank them up there with BBC, AP, Reuters and our own CBC News.
I know you are obsessed but Wilders is polling barely above 20% of votes, with all relevant parties rejecting to form a coalition with him. There is not even remotely a coalition possible that supports nexit.
Dont forget we're two days from national elections, and the prime-minister is from the leading center-right party (VVD) and the mayor of Rotterdam is a key figure in the main center-left party (PvdA). With both being heavily under fire by Wilders (who is the leading 'extreme' person without clear side: party program is one page, refused all debates and didnt run his plans through independent prognostical calculations) for 'selling out our country to Muslims' this was a great opportunity for both to show where they stand. You know, as in 'real man act, losers tweet'.Things might have been really different if Turkey had tried this next week...
'There's the difference between tweeting from the sofa and running a country. If you are in charge of a country you need to take sensible measures,' Rutte replied, to loud applause, in a jab at the Dutch MP known for his love of Twitter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...politician-Geert-Wilders-fiery-TV-debate.html
I hope the dutch watch the US very closely.
That Obamacare repeal is actually a disaster and the tweeter in charge plays golf every weekend.
Wilders was way ahead when Trump won and Wilders alligned himself with him. He has been falling stradily evet since: Trumps disastrous start has been a wake-up call for people considering a protest vote. He has a loyal backing of about 20% who will vote for him, despite him essentially having no program or plans beyond vague rhetoric.
Formations will be tough though. It looks like we'll get a broad cabinet with center, left and right'ish parties involved. Very Dutch.
Yes I was joking and it is sad that in this modern world of instant news; we have to check the source. I would say that the NYT is very reliable, unless you're a Republican, of course.
- - - Updated - - -
See above.
I don't know if that's the case any more, but we had "media competence" sometime in political/social science in High School.
At least for "classical print" you have to distinguish between
- the "report" (hence "reporter"), which should be short and just the statement of confirmed facts *)
- the "article" - a longer (can be from full page to several pages) piece which should take as many perspectives as possible into consideration
- the "opinion"/"editorial" piece, which is usually biased to the point of view of the writer (and there were only a few writers/journalists back in the days so everyone knew their bias as well as their respective publication's bias)
Nowadays everything is mish-mashed into "news". Those clickbait sites basically copy&paste "reports", but alter them in a way that they turn more into opinion pieces. And every blogger with no known background in anything worthwhile gets more reads than well researched articles from actual knowledgeable people.
I'd put NYT, WaPo etc. in the "classical newspaper" corner - so sticking to classical publishing guidelines, which does make them 'easy to understand', if you know the framework or what you're looking at.
*) that's the point where I've crashed frequently with "bad news" readers on social media. The clickbait sites are way too eager to spew an endless stream of rumors, hearsay and simply made-up interpretations of non-confirmed events instead of sticking to the confirmed facts.
On-site sources "in the know" like the Police will not give out official statements immediately. Investigations are not done CSI style and the "bad hombre" is not found, convicted and jailed in 45 minutes.
One eye witness will not tell you "the true story" - eye witnesses are always subjective and biased.
Maybe that's really too much to deal with for clickbait site readers.
Last edited:
Check out who owns the paper and who is the editor. Everything else is just opinion based on the views and politics of the two mentioned.
That's just one part of the puzzle. That "look at the owner" is ignoring that:
a) the owner does not pay for the newspaper, it's the ads that do (so yea, look at the ads in the newspaper ;P and yes, it's catering to the articles they want to have around their ads)
b) look at the readers -especially the subscribers- of the newspaper (those pay for the rest that's not covered by ads and yes, it's catering to what they want to read - WSJ will not write about global warming unless it's a business risk or opportunity
)c) look at the reporter's previous articles - usually they have a certain style of writing (not even necessarily a bias, but anything more than just copy&pasting press releases depends on the individual skill and work the writer puts into it - some manage to make boring data into a compelling story, others not so much)
It's from 2015 - things might have changed:
http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/newspapers-fact-sheet/
Its last reported figure was total revenue of $37.6 billion, with $23.6 billion in ad revenue and $10.9 billion in circulation revenue
Last edited:
This is when I wish there was no profanity filter. We cannot give that latter clause any credibility. None. Zero. -273.16 degrees Kelvin.
Argue about politics all you want, targeting the media as enemies of the people is a hallmark of fascism.
*Unarticulated partisan screech*
Last edited:
Alao how can anybody be cheering for Wilders? The man is an utter basket case. Do they not even google him for basic information? He runs a party of one! Nobody else can join. He is not interested in governance, he's a hate-speech spewing troll.
Last edited:
Wilders was way ahead when Trump won and Wilders alligned himself with him. He has been falling stradily evet since: Trumps disastrous start has been a wake-up call for people considering a protest vote. He has a loyal backing of about 20% who will vote for him, despite him essentially having no program or plans beyond vague rhetoric.
Formations will be tough though. It looks like we'll get a broad cabinet with center, left and right'ish parties involved. Very Dutch.
This had me wondering for a while as well.
Sure. Him being the Strongest Party is really an Shame on the Netherlands.
But with 20% of the Votes hes not going to be Ruling or something. Especially when the other Parties all completely disagree with his Politics.
He will still only Represents 20-25% of the Population. Which is roughly the same as the Polls on Nexit Support.
The other 75-80% might not Agree on other Politics in General. But they aint supporting Wilders idea of leaving EU etc.
Looks like he's getting kicked in the butt pretty badly.
Exit polls show Rutte well ahead and a 3 party tie for 2nd place.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2017/mar/15/dutch-election-voters-go-to-the-polls-in-the-netherlands-live
Labour lost pretty badly.
Exit polls show Rutte well ahead and a 3 party tie for 2nd place.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2017/mar/15/dutch-election-voters-go-to-the-polls-in-the-netherlands-live
Labour lost pretty badly.
Last edited:
I made a seperate topic for the Dutch elections here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/337464-Dutch-elections?p=5283620#post5283620
As for Turkey: EU stands behind the Netherlands so far against Erdogan's hysterical provocations. The last few days he's called us s, a banana-republic, accused us of actively 'slaughtering thousands of muslims' and so on. He can go suck a lemon.
As for Turkey: EU stands behind the Netherlands so far against Erdogan's hysterical provocations. The last few days he's called us s, a banana-republic, accused us of actively 'slaughtering thousands of muslims' and so on. He can go suck a lemon.
Should be a bit clearer now why it's good to have a construct like the EU.
Market size wise Turkey and Netherlands are pretty even, so sanctions might hurt equally, if employed. If Erdogan tries unilateral sanctions against NL and gets slapped by the entire EU, that will hurt Turkey pretty badly.
Hard to bully someone, if he can bring so much reinforcement and you only have Russia to back you.
Market size wise Turkey and Netherlands are pretty even, so sanctions might hurt equally, if employed. If Erdogan tries unilateral sanctions against NL and gets slapped by the entire EU, that will hurt Turkey pretty badly.
Hard to bully someone, if he can bring so much reinforcement and you only have Russia to back you.
Beyond those facts, I think Erdogan may underestimate how the current vibe in the Netherlands is towards Turkey and Islam in general. As much as I despise the hatred towards specifics religion (and I say that as a not-so-big-fan of any religion, to put it mildly...) the Dutch people in general appear more than willing to make a stand here. Simply put: we're more than willing to pay, literally, if that is what it takes to push back against that nutcase.
Last edited:
Yep.
The first Estimates are giving some Pride and Smiles to the People in the Netherlands.
Wilders is apparently far away from the feared result of 20%
Minonian
Banned
And luckily seems like Wilders lost. "luckily"... he was halfway right, in some matters but halfway is just not enough, and to quit from EU? That's a suicide run.
Today, Turkey threatens to cancel the migratory agreement with EU. The Turks begin to be unbearable with their permanent blackmail
Last edited: