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.

(Global Post)   What if foreign journalists covered news in America like American journalists cover foreign news?   (globalpost.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, United States, Americans, GlobalPost, peaceful demonstrations, opposition groups  
•       •       •

11564 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jun 2013 at 6:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-11 06:32:42 PM
I would be just fine if foreign journalists ignored the US until there was either (a) a shooting war, or (b) a mass famine.
 
2013-06-11 06:33:51 PM
Trick question because American journalists/media doesn't cover foreign news as much as our counterparts in Europe and the developed parts of East Asia.

Unless we have troops there or it really involves American interests somehow.
 
2013-06-11 06:34:11 PM
You mean: what if foreign journalists ignored the U.S. entirely?
 
2013-06-11 06:37:35 PM
I had a woman from France tell me that the US media is a huge global spotlight. What they point at, the world sees. She used the example of that french presidential candidate that was caught (or not caught) getting fresh with the maid in NYC a few years ago. She told me it was widely known he was a creep, but the French media didn't really pay much attention to it. Once the US spotlight turned on him, his career was done. Everyone in France went from passive to appalled.
 
2013-06-11 06:48:16 PM
I wanted to like that article, but in the end it just didn't work.
 
2013-06-11 06:51:25 PM
A lot of people are completely unaware of their bias and phraseology.
 
2013-06-11 06:53:37 PM
Most foreign press agencies like to point out the foibles of the U.S. to divert attention away from their own country's problems, while in the U.S., the press examines issues at the molecular level.  It gives some foreign people the false impression that Americans have an unstable society.

The U.S. does air it's dirty laundry, but normally solve problems, while most of the world buries their head in the sand.
 
2013-06-11 06:54:15 PM
" . . . and this is the BBC reporting World News.  Famine in Africa, unrest in the middle east and some stupid gits are doing their usual stupid stuff in the colonies.  Markets are down on the news of all of that daft Yank stuff, but it doesn't really matter since they're on the other side of the ocean anyway.  Back to you, Barbara."
 
2013-06-11 06:56:51 PM
Something Horrible Happened in America
See page D-29
 
2013-06-11 06:59:47 PM
That was awesome.

It's a prime example of how wording can give an altogether different feel to any story whatsoever.
 
2013-06-11 07:00:05 PM
It's good to be the hegemonic hyperpower.
 
2013-06-11 07:02:56 PM

eiger: I wanted to like that article, but in the end it just didn't work.


I think it's the points at which they had to exaggerate to stick with the theme, like the anonymous sources being afraid to speak critically of the government.

Most of it had the ring of truth, and successfully mocked modern template journalism. If they'd reeled it in slightly, it would have worked.
 
2013-06-11 07:05:56 PM
The sad part is, they had to put up a disclaimer saying it was satire.
 
2013-06-11 07:17:31 PM
What's the joke in all this?
 
2013-06-11 07:21:52 PM
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-06-11 07:22:51 PM

Mrbogey: A lot of people are completely unaware of their bias and phraseology.



Ye gods!

/Mayor Shinn does not approve
 
2013-06-11 07:24:56 PM

feanorn: What's the joke in all this?


Jane is still an ignorant slut.
 
2013-06-11 07:31:19 PM
If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle.
 
2013-06-11 07:33:40 PM

Infernalist: That was awesome.

It's a prime example of how wording can give an altogether different feel to any story whatsoever.


Yes, for the first time in a long time I actually got the feeling of truth, in an article about the U.S. That doesn't happen often.

/its a sad state of the world where accurate reporting has to be called 'satire' to see the light of day.
 
2013-06-11 07:34:26 PM

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: The sad part is, they had to put up a disclaimer saying it was satire.


The Year of Poe's Law?
 
2013-06-11 07:38:18 PM
That was a good idea in search of an article; hopefully more and more skilled writers will try the same thing.

Lived in Japan during 9/11, Afghanistan, and the Iraq invasion.  It was fascinating seeing how DIFFERENT American news was compared to either the local reporting or the BBC.  It wasn't so much two sides of the same story, but two complete different stories that were tangentially connected by common names and places.  Rather scary too.
 
2013-06-11 07:44:00 PM

AGremlin: dirty laundry



We got the bubble-headed bleach-blonde who comes on at five
She can tell you about the plane crash with a gleam in her eye
It's interesting when people die, give us dirty laundry

Can we film the operation? Is the head dead yet?
You know the boys in the newsroom got a running bet
Get the widow on the set, we need dirty laundry
 
2013-06-11 07:52:14 PM

100 Watt Walrus: eiger: I wanted to like that article, but in the end it just didn't work.

I think it's the points at which they had to exaggerate to stick with the theme, like the anonymous sources being afraid to speak critically of the government.

Most of it had the ring of truth, and successfully mocked modern template journalism. If they'd reeled it in slightly, it would have worked.


It sounded about as legit as some articles I've read about North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Russia, etc.

Phrasing, dude. Phrasing.
 
2013-06-11 07:53:48 PM
They'd probably consider the NRA our version of Hezbollah.
 
2013-06-11 07:54:48 PM

CliChe Guevara: Infernalist: That was awesome.

It's a prime example of how wording can give an altogether different feel to any story whatsoever.

Yes, for the first time in a long time I actually got the feeling of truth, in an article about the U.S. That doesn't happen often.

/its a sad state of the world where accurate reporting has to be called 'satire' to see the light of day.


Pfft.

Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008.

He was elected President, as a member of one of the 2 major parties, without any significant voter fraud or intimidation, in a democratic system that's been unchanged for more than 200 years (longer than any other democracy in the world with the possible exception of Iceland), during which time we've never had military or dictatorial rule.

If an American journalist were to use 'rise to power' to describe Harper, Merkel, or Cameron he'd be justly accused of hyperbole.

Putin, on the other hand...
 
2013-06-11 07:56:30 PM
My local news used to do a segment called around the world in 80 seconds. 80 whole seconds of news from around the world. Most of the time it was ugly-ass baby animals born in a zoo somewhere. Often this world news was from another state. They finally just gave up on it and now report no news other than local. Thank dog for KCET's news feeds or else I'd have no idea there are people doing things outside my county.
 
2013-06-11 08:00:50 PM
Brilliant piece! So much butthurt in here.
 
2013-06-11 08:02:37 PM
That was great!
 
2013-06-11 08:07:38 PM
Now we need Russia to finance some NGO's (intelligence fronts)  that work to undermine the regime in the name of human rights.

www.tenaflyguy.com
 
2013-06-11 08:12:24 PM

Marshal805: They'd probably consider the NRA our version of Hezbollah.


Death-for-death, probably worse.
 
2013-06-11 08:25:07 PM
I enjoyed it.  And despite the satire, as a Bostonian, I like the description of my city as "a tough-as-nails town synonymous with rebellion".  That version is so much better than the reality.
Described by my grandfather:
"We Bostonians are a bunch of ill-tempered Irishmen, but we're going to elect a black governor and educate the shiat out of people.  Why?  Because fark you and your logic, kid."
 
2013-06-11 08:25:56 PM

Eomatrix: I enjoyed it.  And despite the satire, as a Bostonian, I like the description of my city as "a tough-as-nails town synonymous with rebellion".  That version is so much better than the reality.
Described by my grandfather:
"We Bostonians are a bunch of ill-tempered Irishmen, but we're going to elect a black governor and educate the shiat out of people.  Why?  Because fark you and your logic, kid."


lol!
 
2013-06-11 08:32:25 PM
Thanks subby: They now know I've read that article. When I'm denied clearance, I'll point to you. After they look at Fark's logs, you'll be the one who's Farked. Drew's been a pushover drunk for a while now, you think he's gonna stand up again them?
 
2013-06-11 08:32:36 PM

FrancoFile: CliChe Guevara: Infernalist: That was awesome.

It's a prime example of how wording can give an altogether different feel to any story whatsoever.

Yes, for the first time in a long time I actually got the feeling of truth, in an article about the U.S. That doesn't happen often.

/its a sad state of the world where accurate reporting has to be called 'satire' to see the light of day.

Pfft.

Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008.

He was elected President, as a member of one of the 2 major parties, without any significant voter fraud or intimidation, in a democratic system that's been unchanged for more than 200 years (longer than any other democracy in the world with the possible exception of Iceland), during which time we've never had military or dictatorial rule.

If an American journalist were to use 'rise to power' to describe Harper, Merkel, or Cameron he'd be justly accused of hyperbole.

Putin, on the other hand...


Putin rides bears. Ain't no democracy stopping that.
 
2013-06-11 08:58:53 PM
I thought it was called "RT" ?
 
2013-06-11 09:00:42 PM
How is this satire? Looks like a Guardian article from 2003.
 
2013-06-11 09:12:09 PM
That matches up pretty well with the filter in my head.
 
2013-06-11 09:17:29 PM

davidphogan: It sounded about as legit as some articles I've read about North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Russia, etc.


I have to second this.
 
2013-06-11 09:18:31 PM

FrancoFile: Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008. He was elected President



 So how is that not a rise into power again?

 No one said he took it by force or by underhanded measures, only that he rose to power. How is that incorrect? Was it not a 'rise', as in he was already that powerful beforehand, or do you not consider it 'power' to have assumed a position that is arguably that of the most influential man in the world? Not understanding you objection here.
 
2013-06-11 09:29:01 PM

CliChe Guevara: FrancoFile: Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008. He was elected President


 So how is that not a rise into power again?

 No one said he took it by force or by underhanded measures, only that he rose to power. How is that incorrect? Was it not a 'rise', as in he was already that powerful beforehand, or do you not consider it 'power' to have assumed a position that is arguably that of the most influential man in the world? Not understanding you objection here.


'Rise to power' is journalistic shorthand for 'Seized power illegally, or through trickery, or because his electorate is a bunch of gullible dumbasses.'  It can even mean 'look at those people with their funny clothes and weird language, they are uncivilized'.  It implies much more than the literal meaning of the words.

Compare that with 'came to power'.  If you gather statistics on the two phrases, you'll find that 'came to power' = 1st world, democratic, or both.
 
2013-06-11 09:48:37 PM
As long as American journalists reprint State Department hand outs, why yes, our news of foreign lands will continue to sound like this.
 
2013-06-11 10:01:54 PM
What does a guy have to do to see an link about the married US ambassador to Belgium, a major Obama donor, being accused of soliciting underage prostitutes uploaded to Fark?  That was the biggest story of the day, but nada on this site.
 
Oak
2013-06-11 11:46:27 PM

FrancoFile: CliChe Guevara: FrancoFile: Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008. He was elected President


 So how is that not a rise into power again?

 No one said he took it by force or by underhanded measures, only that he rose to power. How is that incorrect? Was it not a 'rise', as in he was already that powerful beforehand, or do you not consider it 'power' to have assumed a position that is arguably that of the most influential man in the world? Not understanding you objection here.

'Rise to power' is journalistic shorthand for 'Seized power illegally, or through trickery, or because his electorate is a bunch of gullible dumbasses.'  It can even mean 'look at those people with their funny clothes and weird language, they are uncivilized'.  It implies much more than the literal meaning of the words.

Compare that with 'came to power'.  If you gather statistics on the two phrases, you'll find that 'came to power' = 1st world, democratic, or both.


Your words, and your defense of the use of the phrase, whether intended or not,

Also see: Bush 2, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy....
 
2013-06-12 02:22:24 AM

FrancoFile: 'Rise to power' is journalistic shorthand for 'Seized power illegally, or through trickery, or because his electorate is a bunch of gullible dumbasses.'  It can even mean 'look at those people with their funny clothes and weird language, they are uncivilized'.  It implies much more than the literal meaning of the words.

Compare that with 'came to power'.  If you gather statistics on the two phrases, you'll find that 'came to power' = 1st world, democratic, or both.


thatsthejoke.jpg
 
2013-06-12 02:27:46 AM

FrancoFile: 'Rise to power' is journalistic shorthand for 'Seized power illegally


Maybe you just have a newer copy of the secret journalistic shorthand manual than the rest of us.
 
2013-06-12 02:37:00 AM
looks about right to me.
 
2013-06-12 04:41:26 AM

AGremlin: Most foreign press agencies like to point out the foibles of the U.S. to divert attention away from their own country's problems, while in the U.S., the press examines issues at the molecular level.  It gives some foreign people the false impression that Americans have an unstable society.

The U.S. does air it's dirty laundry, but normally solve problems, while most of the world buries their head in the sand.


Aw, that's adorable, you actually believe that.

Your media obsesses over irrelevant details and fake "-gate" scandals and completely ignores the real issues.  Your news networks are just a bunch of 24/7 dog whistles.  That you are fooled by this speaks poorly of your media literacy.

And you don't "solve problems" you wait until the next big distracting thing happens, the media shuts up, and you all forget about it.

All this hoo-hah about the NSA will come to exactly nothing.  Nothing will change.  Maybe you'll get an inquiry, and it will be officially whitewashed.  But by the time any inquiry issues a report, you'll all be onto something else and won't care.
 
2013-06-12 05:22:05 AM
I don't get it... where's the satire part?
 
2013-06-12 10:35:04 AM
FrancoFile:

Barack Obama didn't 'rise to power' in 2008.

He was elected President, as a member of one of the 2 major parties, without any significant voter fraud or intimidation, in a democratic system that's been unchanged for more than 200 100 years (longer than any other democracy in the world with the possible exception of Iceland), during which time we've never had military or dictatorial rule.

If an American journalist were to use 'rise to power' to describe Harper, Merkel, or Cameron he'd be justly accused of hyperbole.

Putin, on the other hand...


The U.S. didn't have universal direct election of Senators by the public until 1913, which was a *very* significant change that had been pushed for for about 70-80 years, but wasn't implemented until case after case of cronyism and corruption, not to mention deadlocked state bodies that couldn't elect anyone, and the fact that each state differed in their selection process, finally convinced the states (who would be giving up power by doing so) to ratify changes for direct election. It didn't even start until 1907, with Oregon.

An interesting, short read:  http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Direct_El e ction_Senators.htm

Picture your current typical state legislator. Now picture that person and  n like him selecting someone to serve in Federal office, in today's political climate. Really. Think about what some state Reps and Senators say publicly...and then allow them to pick your Senator.

Shudder
 
2013-06-12 11:32:37 AM
What if foreign journalists covered news in America like American journalists cover foreign news?

Then the NSA story would still be a "secret".
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report