If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(GET OUT OF THE WAY)   Weird: Columnist argues the National Enquirer should win the Pulitzer Prize. Fark: She kinda has a point   (politicsdaily.com) divider line 102
    More: Interesting, Pulitzer, Elizabeth Edwards, National Enquirer, John Edwards, Pulitzer Prizes, John Edwards Scandal, Rielle Hunter, Andrew Young  
•       •       •

27244 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2010 at 6:07 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-01-10 07:14:52 PM
olddinosaur: mloree: jaytkay:
Well, here's a real "raving idiot" for you:


"The scientific base for a greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time."
-------------DR. ROGER REVELLE Ph.D. ,professor of oceanography, guru to Al Bore Gore, and widely regarded as the "father" of the unproven Global Warming hypothesis.

"--------citation needed--------"

I don't usually to scholarly research for free for lazy scholars, but here ya go: Link (new window)


Interesting quote there - if you actually read your link you find that:

a) this quote was made in 1991 - what could we have possibly learned about climate change in the last two hottest decades the earth has ever had since we started measuring?

b) He meand DRASTIC change, he still thought we had to go "beyond" what politicians like Gore were proposing.

/ Why am I debunking climate denialist derp on a thread about the enquirer?
 
2010-01-10 07:15:17 PM
The new details in this book provide further evidence that the mainstream reporters on the campaign trail with Edwards could have uncovered the adultery and possibly out-of-wedlock child if they had pushed the outraged former staff members for answers.

Why would the left wing liberturd controlled mainstream media want the truth about Edwards or Obama or any other Democrat? That's called career suicide when it's not Nixon or some other Republican. Gennifer Flowers played an answering machine message from Clinton during his first campaign and that was completely ignored.

From Wikipedia:

In December 1996, Gennifer Flowers admitted to her sexual relationship with Bill Clinton on The Richard Bey Show. The show was canceled the following day. Richard Bey later attributed a direct connection between the two consecutive events (see TV appearances). (new window)

After that nobody wants to be the one revealing the truth about the left wing.
 
2010-01-10 07:16:12 PM
Paging Janet Cooke. Let's ask her.

Give it to them. At least they're not making it up.
 
2010-01-10 07:16:56 PM
Taxcheat: I also happen to think The Onion has broken more news in the past few years than the Washington Post.

The Washington Post has been resting on its laurels since Watergate.
 
2010-01-10 07:19:26 PM
jaytkay: olddinosaur: Surprise, surprise. My hometown paper is in fact losing money, and has had to downsize drastically...They blame it on the Innertubes, but I would say they don't report the news accurately.

Are papers who "report the news accurately" making money?


Good question. Does anyone know of any that are reporting accurately?
 
2010-01-10 07:21:25 PM
MSM is too busy covering PALIN!PALIN!PALIN!PALIN!

/and Jersey Guidos
 
2010-01-10 07:28:13 PM
True story: I knew a guy once who had a state Fish and Game license to "rehabilitate" snakes that had been injured by cars or whatever, or abused by their owners and then seized by Fish and Game. He decided to have a press conference to explain what he considered to be important work. He invited the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register. One of those papers had a National Enquirer mole on staff, and all three papers sent reporters to the press conference.

The Times got every single fact wrong. Every. Single. Fact. Including the guy's name. Was in the OC Local section, buried by ads. No pics.

The Register played it for laughs, though they did get most facts straight. Last page of local section. No pics.

The Enquirer played it absolutely straight and got every fact right. Page 4 story. With pics.

I know, since I saw all three clippings.
 
2010-01-10 07:33:59 PM
The homeless nut-jobs spouting-off crap get it right once in a while, too... They don't deserve a Pulitzer for finding specious evidence that accidentally happened to be accurate, and revealing a story that no-one believed, which therefore had no effect on anyone.
 
2010-01-10 07:34:39 PM
rev. dave: I think that they should win the prize just to spite the other newspapers. Newspaper journalism in this time is less credible than the yellow journalism of the early 1900's. After the Enquirer wins the Pulitzer the owners of all the other papers in the country should fire their entire staff and then wait 10 years and start over from scratch.

If the papers do fire their entire staff and reform in 10 years with new staff under the same business model the results will be the same. Newspapers (and all news media) sell eyeballs to advertisers and the staff simply conforms to the business model. Their customers are the advertisers, not the readers. Creating a well informed readership is simply not a part of the equation, and indeed may be detrimental to the advertiser's interests.
 
2010-01-10 07:45:25 PM
buckers1: There is a whole bunch of stupid in these posts so far.

For all the global warming topics: please read state of fear by michael crighton. Story is good but just his real facts and application might make you think twice about global warming.



Fiction. Have it explained to you. I don't have the time.
 
2010-01-10 07:49:09 PM
That_Dude: didn't the John Edwards story happen in 2007/2008?

--- NOPE !!!
 
2010-01-10 07:56:56 PM
olddinosaur: QUESTION: Can anybody explain to me why I ought to pay for a newspaper, when the people who read it know more about current events than the people who write it?

Because serious investigative journalism is extremely expensive, and the blogosphere has not yet found a way to replace traditional reporting. That doesn't mean corporate media is perfect, or that the "new media" is not valuable. Take advantage of the resources currently available and use your head to work out what to believe. Twitter and Facebook don't do real journalism.

olddinosaur: Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize, for dragging the Vietnam War out years after everyone knew it was a lost cause, using "---national prestige---" as a reason to keep fighting.

Kissinger won the Nobel for the Paris Peace Accords, not his conduct of the war. It's still absurd that he was honored instead of tried for war crimes, but the Nobel Prize committee awards the Peace Prize for specific acts even if the actor is an asshole.
 
2010-01-10 08:04:20 PM
bookman: The Enquirer played it absolutely straight and got every fact right. Page 4 story. With pics.

Good, because I never doubted this for a moment:

www.freewilliamsburg.com
 
2010-01-10 08:08:03 PM
demonfaerie olddinosaur: Turfshoe: If Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, and Al Bore Gore can win another Peace Prize for the Global Warming Hoax, why can't the Enquirer win a Pulitzer?

Fixed it for you.

Your entitled to your opinion, but I'd have to stay after living in Wisconsin my entire life, I can see why a lot of people do believe in Global Warming. We use to get snow in October, if not definitely snow before Thanksgiving we are lucky now to get snow in November now, and its getting worse are winters are getting shorter.



The data beg to differ with you. The heaviest showfall in Madison, WI in the last 125 years happened just recently.

www.aos.wisc.edu
 
2010-01-10 08:09:42 PM
I can see where she's coming from but really, it's not even well-written fiction.
 
2010-01-10 08:10:48 PM
Herb Utsmelz: buckers1: There is a whole bunch of stupid in these posts so far.

For all the global warming topics: please read state of fear by michael crighton. Story is good but just his real facts and application might make you think twice about global warming.


Fiction. Have it explained to you. I don't have the time.


Michael Crichton also believed in spoon bending ^, among other crazy sh*t. The man wrote some fun books, but he was no scientist.
 
2010-01-10 08:13:35 PM
The National Enquirer may be full of b.s., but if they say you're going to die...you best make arrangements.
 
2010-01-10 08:14:15 PM
mloree: jaytkay: olddinosaur: My home town paper refuses to cover Climategate, and the Editor herself admitted to me: "---we don't cover anything negative about global warming."

good. The editor of your local paper is not a raving idiot like yourself.


That's becasue his hometown paper is The Onion.


/P.S. mloree, you are the worst kind of person there is in this world. A religious fanatic.
 
2010-01-10 08:16:56 PM
Scorpius.Raven: jaytkay: MIU: The Onion was goddamn prescient at the start of the 2000's. Nevermind news, they predicted it in advance!

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over' - January 17, 2001 (new window)

That is just freaking disturbing. Written before 9/11 even...


Agreed, very disturbing, and yet, so so true
 
2010-01-10 08:20:47 PM
olddinosaur: My home town paper refuses to cover Climategate, and the Editor herself admitted to me: "---we don't cover anything negative about global warming."

And if your paper's web site allows comments, read them and notice the many critics of the paper's viewpoints.
 
2010-01-10 08:24:19 PM
buckers1: For all the global warming topics: please read state of fear by michael crighton. Story is good but just his real facts and application might make you think twice about global warming.

His "real facts" were from researchers whose methods were hilarious and essentially amounted to using a dowsing rod.
 
2010-01-10 08:27:48 PM
bubbaprog: His "real facts" were from researchers whose methods were hilarious and essentially amounted to using a dowsing rod.

Laugh all you want, but Iraq is buying dowsing rods to find explosives. It works great.

EXPLOSIVE FOUND!!1!
www.wired.com
 
2010-01-10 08:51:38 PM
Pumpernickel bread: demonfaerie olddinosaur: Turfshoe: If Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, and Al Bore Gore can win another Peace Prize for the Global Warming Hoax, why can't the Enquirer win a Pulitzer?

Fixed it for you.

Your entitled to your opinion, but I'd have to stay after living in Wisconsin my entire life, I can see why a lot of people do believe in Global Warming. We use to get snow in October, if not definitely snow before Thanksgiving we are lucky now to get snow in November now, and its getting worse are winters are getting shorter.


The data beg to differ with you. The heaviest showfall in Madison, WI in the last 125 years happened just recently.


You need to get on board, comrade. Global warming CAUSES heavy snowfalls.
 
2010-01-10 08:52:00 PM
If the Enquirer wants a prize then it seems only fair that TMZ gets some sort of award since they always are the first source of celebrity bombshells/deaths.
 
2010-01-10 08:52:14 PM
Tawdry affairs and moral panic are not substantial investigative reporting.
That the National Enquirer should be suggested as the pinnacle US reportage more readily implies that US reportage has diminished in quality, not that the national Enquirer has upped its quality.
Who the frak cares if some guy has a mistress? It's tabloid shiat.
There are actual issues in the world that actually matter.
 
MIU
2010-01-10 08:52:48 PM
jaytkay: MIU: The Onion was goddamn prescient at the start of the 2000's. Nevermind news, they predicted it in advance!

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over' - January 17, 2001 (new window)


Yeah. Try to tell me that isn't farking time travel right there.

Even I was shocked at how right they ended up being.
 
2010-01-10 09:01:37 PM
Next up for the Pulitzer:

blogs.citypages.com
 
2010-01-10 09:10:08 PM
 
2010-01-10 09:12:15 PM
Speaking of awards, wasn't John Edwards also named the biggest douche in the universe?

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2010-01-10 09:12:40 PM
Obviously since every other news organization in America is in a race to become more like the NE with every passing day, they definitely deserve the Pulitzer.
 
2010-01-10 09:13:36 PM
FTA
"which broke the biggest political scandal of 2009, the John Edwards affair."

You're kidding me right? The biggest political scandal of 2009? Realllly?

Gimme a break.
 
2010-01-10 09:20:07 PM
Even more troubling: Would a leading Republican presidential candidate have similarly escaped the media's scrutiny?

Exactly. Meanwhile, every liberal in America put their fingers in the ears and screams "la la la la I can't hear you! la la la la"
 
2010-01-10 09:22:15 PM
pureobscure: Even more troubling: Would a leading Republican presidential candidate have similarly escaped the media's scrutiny?

Hate facts will be made illegal soon.
 
2010-01-10 09:22:19 PM
Fano: You need to get on board, comrade. Global warming CAUSES heavy snowfalls.

You guys are a moving target. First, one guy says GW is causing shorter winters and less snowfall in WI. Show data indicating this isn't true and now it is "well, GW actually causes increased snowfall". Tell us that the polar icecaps will be non-existent during the summer in the next few years, but the fact is arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007.

Here is a competing theory to your CO2 GW:

Link (new window)
 
2010-01-10 09:43:03 PM
Yeeeahh...no.
 
2010-01-10 10:07:21 PM
pureobscure: Even more troubling: Would a leading Republican presidential candidate have similarly escaped the media's scrutiny?

Exactly. Meanwhile, every liberal in America put their fingers in the ears and screams "la la la la I can't hear you! la la la la"


Every liberal I knew, including myself, was absolutely furious with Edwards. Not only was his behavior despicable, it could have been disastrous for the Democratic party if this had come out later, if he won the nomination or was selected as the VP candidate or another high-profile position. His political career is over.

The only reason he "escaped the media's scrutiny" is because there was no controversy. It's not like the story wasn't reported. Republicans said "See! Edwards is a lying asshole!" and Democrats responded by saying, "Yep. F*ck that guy."
 
2010-01-10 10:12:02 PM
The mainstream media in the USA has become nothing more than the lapdogs of the power establishment. Their bullshiat 'neutrality' is absurd. They are very biased, biased for more government in most cases. They are lazy and often all they really do print/read the press releases from the government in most cases. They don't investigate or check squat. They lack followups. There is a reason they are dying.

The National Enquirer might not be the best paper the planet has ever seen but it looks like while everyone else got fat and lazy they are still busting their ass. Looks like they aren't afraid to take some risks and put in some time. It might not be worth a reward but the way things are going they might be the last ones standing.

/You can't find the truth unless you're willing to be called a kook.
 
2010-01-10 10:29:48 PM
mod_reright: Every liberal I knew, including myself, was absolutely furious with Edwards. Not only was his behavior despicable, it could have been disastrous for the Democratic party if this had come out later, if he won the nomination or was selected as the VP candidate or another high-profile position. His political career is over.

I'm not a liberal, but I still have to agree with this. I think most were glad to see him gone.

I lived in NC when he was elected to the Senate, and I couldn't understand even back then how people didn't recognize him for what he was. Some folks give off that weasel vibe. He gives off tremors of weaselly nastiness.

Karma wins this time.
 
2010-01-10 10:41:27 PM
mod_reright: pureobscure: Even more troubling: Would a leading Republican presidential candidate have similarly escaped the media's scrutiny?

Exactly. Meanwhile, every liberal in America put their fingers in the ears and screams "la la la la I can't hear you! la la la la"

Every liberal I knew, including myself, was absolutely furious with Edwards. Not only was his behavior despicable, it could have been disastrous for the Democratic party if this had come out later, if he won the nomination or was selected as the VP candidate or another high-profile position. His political career is over.

The only reason he "escaped the media's scrutiny" is because there was no controversy. It's not like the story wasn't reported. Republicans said "See! Edwards is a lying asshole!" and Democrats responded by saying, "Yep. F*ck that guy."


This affair WAS news. Because here this asshole was going to ride his wife's cancer-ridden corpse to the White House and he was farking around. No, farker, you can't point to "I love my dying wife, can you give me a sympathy vote for seeing that I am a doting husband" when you are nailing someone else.

Affairs are important; if you are a candidate that makes your family a point of your campaign. If you never pretended to be a moral guardian or family man, it's not so bad.
 
2010-01-10 10:53:18 PM
Pumpernickel bread: Fano: You need to get on board, comrade. Global warming CAUSES heavy snowfalls.

You guys are a moving target. First, one guy says GW is causing shorter winters and less snowfall in WI. Show data indicating this isn't true and now it is "well, GW actually causes increased snowfall". Tell us that the polar icecaps will be non-existent during the summer in the next few years, but the fact is arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007.

Here is a competing theory to your CO2 GW:

Link (new window)


GW is not all powerful. He's got an awesome squint, and he sounds like English is his second language, but he is NOT a communist!
 
2010-01-10 11:19:16 PM
olddinosaur: My home town paper refuses to cover Climategate, and the Editor herself admitted to me: "---we don't cover anything negative about global warming."

Five of the major networks have failed to cover the story, despite it being all over the Innertubes, so I guess if the shoe fits--throw it at George Bush or something.

QUESTION: Can anybody explain to me why I ought to pay for a newspaper, when the people who read it know more about current events than the people who write it?


Heh. I bet they never covered the "truth" about 9/11 either.
 
2010-01-10 11:24:58 PM
olddinosaur: Turfshoe: If Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, and Al Bore Gore can win another Peace Prize for the Global Warming Hoax, why can't the Enquirer win a Pulitzer?

Fixed it for you.


Zactly
lukeford.net
 
2010-01-11 12:31:23 AM
polarisTheArcticRescueMoose: I'll just leave this here... (new window)

If you're trying to imply that this single article somehow disproves global warming you've failed to comprehend the point of the article and the author's conclusions. The article is about the fraction of annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions that stay in the atmosphere, it is not about the overall atmospheric CO2 trend, on which the author does not comment at all. All he concludes is that the fraction of annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions that stays in the atmosphere is relatively constant, but only if you play with the data in the ways that he likes. He admits that his work also shows that this fraction is increasing if he uses the methods of previous authors, but he makes no attempt to reconcile the difference.
 
2010-01-11 12:38:32 AM
What, 100 posts and no attention whore graphic?
 
2010-01-11 12:44:11 AM
Turfshoe: If Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, why can't the Enquirer win a Pulitzer?

Over in however many posts that was.
 
2010-01-11 01:39:22 AM
In other news, Bat-boy consults a broken clock twice daily.
 
2010-01-11 01:49:51 AM
More like an Orwell Peace Prize.
 
2010-01-11 08:52:31 AM
Journalism is dead. Has been for decades. The Enquirer is just as legitimate as any other "news" source.
 
2010-01-11 10:07:34 AM
It must be true, I read it in the Globe!

www.global-air.com

(new window)
 
2010-01-11 10:22:15 AM
doubled99: Journalism is dead. Has been for decades. The Enquirer is just as legitimate as any other "news" source.

Do you feel clever for being cynical? The only problem with that would be the fact that making an inane cynical statement is every bit as much an indication not really thinking one's views through in an intelligent matter, as credulously accepting anything one hears is.

There has been much good journalism and much bad journalism since well before you were born. People who aren't intellectually lazy learn to distinguish the two, and (to this day, as they always have) manage find the former in spite of the latter. And then there are the people who just smugly say "It's all the same bull" and think they're showing themselves to be adroit critical thinkers by doing so, when in fact, it just make it look like they're finding a convenient way of exempting themselves from bothering to pay attention to the information available through journalism.
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report