Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Yahoo)   Dems "working to clean up the financial mess left by Republicans," according to this editorial--I mean, news item. In related news, there is no such thing as liberal media bias   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
264
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

4689 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2007 at 8:15 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



264 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
robmilmel
2007-02-02 6:45:01 PM  
It's not like the Republican-controlled congress basically blew off their final weeks of work or anything...including spending bills. Or the deficit. Not including the whole war part of the deficit.
 
Doctor Hooey
2007-02-02 6:48:29 PM  
I wager subby wont be joining this thread to itemize the countless financial successes of the GOP, as he wouldn't have time to do anything else, like fellate his anatomically-correct GWB bobblehead
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 6:49:44 PM  
For you, submitter:

[image from moderndaydad.com too old to be available]
 
dna_level_c
2007-02-02 6:51:00 PM  
Doctor Hooey: fellate his anatomically-correct GWB bobblehead

Don't you have that backwards?

/heh heh, you said "bobblehead"
 
EatHam [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 6:51:05 PM  
What makes it editorializing is that there is no hard and fast definition of a financial mess. There are plenty of people who believe that the government isn't in enough debt. I don't agree with them, but they are out there, and they have arguments that do make sense.
 
Boojum2k
2007-02-02 6:57:24 PM  
"Financial mess" is editorializing, not reporting. It's certainly a valid viewpoint though, not something like "so-called moon landing" or some other fringe opinion.
 
Yanks_RSJ
2007-02-02 7:03:50 PM  
The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget as Democrats cleared away the financial mess they inherited from Republicans.

That is an unaccetable lede, by any journalistic standards for objectivity.

There is no debating that. We can all debate the accuracy of the sentiment expressed all day long, but for an AP story to begin this way is completely inexcusable. That's not how journalists are taught, and its an intentionally biased and leading headline.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:04:24 PM  
so...what exactly would you call it?

'financial happy fun place'?

they refused to pass spending bills for the next year's budget - this isn't even getting into 'enough debt' conversations. this is 'they didn't do their jobs'.
 
EatHam [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:06:12 PM  
heap: so...what exactly would you call it?

Before:
WASHINGTON - The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget as Democrats cleared away the financial mess they inherited from Republicans.

After:
WASHINGTON - The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:11:31 PM  
so...we just don't acknowledge the reason that budgets are being wrangled in the opening session?

it just didn't happen now, or something?
 
cameroncrazy1984 [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:16:29 PM  
Submitter doesn't like it because it doesn't paint the Democrats as huge spenders, like that other article that was on here a little bit ago.
 
EatHam [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:16:58 PM  
heap:

so...we just don't acknowledge the reason that budgets are being wrangled in the opening session?

It is impossible to think that it is appropriate to portray Democrats as the heroes, flying in wearing Superman capes to rid the world of the evil Republican financial mess, and have the mental capacity to breathe. If you can't understand that this is editorializing and inappropriate, then I'd have a better chance teaching my dog calculus than explaining it to you.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:23:51 PM  
EatHam: It is impossible to think that it is appropriate to portray Democrats as the heroes, flying in wearing Superman capes to rid the world of the evil Republican financial mess, and have the mental capacity to breathe.

dude - this would all be true if the republicans had not actually refused to pass spending bills in their closing session.

the fact that it accurately portrays the situation must really, really, really bother you....as you refuse to acknowledge this.

it has shiat nor shinola to do with 'enough debt', the amount of spending, or what the spending was on....it has to do with the fact that they up and decided 'screw it, we'll make them pass the spending bills. hah!'. that isn't congressional responsibility, that's friggin spite.

yah, i know...your dog, calculus, i am teh dumbersz!

none of which addresses the fact that the outgoing congress refused to do their jobs. if you can't describe that as a financial mess, maybe we should lower the bar even further and never ever say anything bad, even if it is. somebody might get their feelings hurt!
 
Lionel Mandrake
2007-02-02 7:26:40 PM  
Yeah, that shiat should have definitely been edited out. Doesn't mean it's inaccurate.

Once you're done whining, go to FOX for your "Fair and Balanced news."

Definitely no bias there.
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 7:30:18 PM  
How's this for the right line:

The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget as Democrats attempt to clear away the financial mess they inherited from the Republican-controlled 109th Congress' final weeks.

heap:

dude - this would all be true if the republicans had not actually refused to pass spending bills in their closing session.

the fact that it accurately portrays the situation must really, really, really bother you....as you refuse to acknowledge this.

Just to make sure this part doesn't get ignored a fourth time.
 
Snarfangel
2007-02-02 7:30:35 PM  
There may be biased liberals in the media without liberal media bias.

/just need enough on the other side to balance out.
 
Yanks_RSJ
2007-02-02 7:31:15 PM  
heap: if you can't describe that as a financial mess, maybe we should lower the bar even further and never ever say anything bad, even if it is. somebody might get their feelings hurt!

That's not the point, at all. They can address the "mess" with the body of the article. To include that black-and-white assessment of the situation so casually in the lede is completely subjective and as I mentioned before, goes against basic journalistic rules.

Its not about hurting feelings, its about maintaining a level of journalistic objectivity.

Think of it this way, you can't write a story about an arrest by saying, "Police arrested so-and-so today, putting behind bars one of the biggest dirtbags in town."
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:34:45 PM  
Yanks_RSJ: To include that black-and-white assessment of the situation so casually in the lede is completely subjective and as I mentioned before, goes against basic journalistic rules.

well, as close as i come to journalism school is....well...here, i guess.

i don't proclaim to know what journalistic or editorial standards should be upheld.

it just seems like describing 'refusing to pass spending bills for spite' as a 'financial mess' is entirely accurate.

if journalistic objectivity doesn't involve accuracy...what good is it? just seems like an excuse to never call a pile of shiat...a pile of shiat.
 
Nabb1
2007-02-02 7:34:46 PM  
That's editorializing. Whether you think it is good or not probably depends on your Kool-Aid consumption.
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 7:39:00 PM  
Yanks_RSJ, I'm mostly agree with you, but I doubt submitter cares much about the debate over what constitutes proper journalism and is more likely peeved the Republicans were called out as asses. I also think with the proper context of said mess (like I gave above, probably badly though), it's more acceptable.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:41:35 PM  
heap: i don't proclaim to know what journalistic or editorial standards should be upheld.

I do--my degree is in journalism.

At the very least they could have said something like "in a move Democrats characterized as cleaning up the Republicans' mess." Every journalist knows the way to get your opinion into a new article is simply to quote someone who thinks the same thing you do.

But those saying they needed to just stick to the facts and not mention inheriting any mess at all are describing the standards journalists are supposed to uphold. As it is, this editorializing as news example is not only unethical and unprofessional, it's downright lazy. The writer didn't even bother trying to hide his opinion behind a talking head. If I was an AP editor I'd cut this stringer loose.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:42:48 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: But those saying they needed to just stick to the facts and not mention inheriting any mess at all are describing the standards journalists are supposed to uphold.

so...it just never happened?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:43:42 PM  
Solid State Vittles:

I doubt submitter cares much about the debate over what constitutes proper journalism and is more likely peeved the Republicans were called out as asses.

Submitter here. The asses involved here are

A. The folks at AP, who pissed away their chance at sparking a legitimate debate in this article by trying to tell the readers what to think, and

B. People who insist right-tilting news at, say, Fox is right-wing media bias, but left-tilting news like this is just accurate, and why snivel about it?

Sauce for the goose, fellas.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:44:39 PM  
heap: so...it just never happened?

What never happened?
 
Yanks_RSJ
2007-02-02 7:45:43 PM  
I don't debate that the budget is, in fact, a mess. But as I've already said, the situation needs to be established in a less dismissive way.

The facts of the "mess" are critical to the article, and need to be there. What doesn't is the author's opinion.

This is four years of Journalism school talking here, I'm not writing to see my own words on the internet.
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 7:48:01 PM  
heap:

so...it just never happened?

It's not the writer's call as to whether or not it was a "mess" seems to be the heart of the matter.

MyNameIsNotMervGriffin

Submitter here. The asses involved here are

A. The folks at AP, who pissed away their chance at sparking a legitimate debate in this article by trying to tell the readers what to think, and

B. People who insist right-tilting news at, say, Fox is right-wing media bias, but left-tilting news like this is just accurate, and why snivel about it?

Sauce for the goose, fellas.

Fair enough, I stand corrected and, as mentioned above, I am inclined to agree. I think your previous line At the very least they could have said something like "in a move Democrats characterized as cleaning up the Republicans' mess." pretty much sums it up.
 
Lionel Mandrake
2007-02-02 7:49:26 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: The asses involved here are

A. The folks at AP, who pissed away their chance at sparking a legitimate debate in this article by trying to tell the readers what to think

Exactly, merely reporting that the GOP - after losing - refused to do any further work on the budget and pass it off, incomplete, to the Dems would have been enough.

Anyone with a three-digit IQ could have filled in the part about it being a "mess."
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:51:32 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: What never happened?

the reason that budgets are being wrangled in the opening session.

But those saying they needed to just stick to the facts and not mention inheriting any mess at all are describing the standards journalists are supposed to uphold.

if they don't mention the fact that they are inheriting a spending/budget bills, it just seems like they're spending because it's fun.

not mentioning the reason that they are doing this is *leaving out* a fact. not sticking to them.

Yanks_RSJ: The facts of the "mess" are critical to the article, and need to be there. What doesn't is the author's opinion.

that, i don't disagree with one iota. i'm just not so sure that 'refusing to pass spending bills for spite' makes 'financial mess' an opinion. could be worded a lot better, no doubt, but it doesn't seem like an opinion, either.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:53:01 PM  
Solid State Vittles: It's not the writer's call as to whether or not it was a "mess" seems to be the heart of the matter.

again, it could be worded a lot better.

would you say that it is at all inaccurate, however?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-02 7:53:18 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: heap: so...it just never happened?

Stories like this are written in what's called the inverted pyramid style, meaning they are supposed to be short, concise and start with the most important, salient facts and proceed to the least important facts.

The first sentence is called the lede; it's supposed to represent the entire story for those skimming the news.

Congress passed a spending bill: Fact. It was a Democratic spending bill: Fact. It was for about $450 billion: Fact. The fact that this budget session was contentious (although the writer didn't mention it).

Its main effect was to clean up a mess left by Republicans: Writer's opinion, and it has no place here. This is not analysis, commentary, an opinion column or an editorial--it's supposed to be news.

As I said before, the very least they could have done is quote a talking head saying "Today we cleaned up part of the Republicans' mess."

This is just unprofessional and lazy.
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 7:55:08 PM  
heap

would you say that it is at all inaccurate, however?

No, not at all, but that's my opinion based on the facts of the situation. Lionel Mandrake pretty much nailed it. I guess that gives me a three-digit IQ! Cool! I'm in the 30's!
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:56:18 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: Its main effect was to clean up a mess left by Republicans: Writer's opinion

erm....no, it is being passed in this congress because the outgoing session refused to do so. fact: that session was republican led.

leaving this out 'just because' is not objective in the slightest.
 
Nabb1
2007-02-02 7:56:21 PM  
heap: i'm just not so sure that 'refusing to pass spending bills for spite' makes 'financial mess' an opinion. could be worded a lot better, no doubt, but it doesn't seem like an opinion, either.

You have two people schooled in journalism who already said it's editorializing and crossed the line. I minored in journalism and I agree. Calling it a "mess" is subjective. Saying the budget was incomplete when the Republican Congress's session ended would be a fact. Calling that a "mess" is an opinion. And it would have been easy to get Congressman Joe Schmoe (D) to throw in a quote about it being a "mess." It's sloppy work, and obviously the author doesn't care whether or not his imparitiality, and hence his professional reputation, is called into question.
 
heap
2007-02-02 7:59:15 PM  
Nabb1: You have two people schooled in journalism who already said it's editorializing and crossed the line.

and i've said i know shiat nor shinola about journalistic integrity or editorial standards. i aint trying to tell them their jobs.

it still strikes me as accurate. saying nothing about the reasoning for the spending bills being wrangled in the opening session strikes me as just as bad as describing the reasoning in a sloppy fashion.

It's sloppy work

with that, i think you've probably summed up my thoughts on about 99.44% of all major news media.
 
Nabb1
2007-02-02 8:01:39 PM  
heap: it still strikes me as accurate.

Because you agree with the writer's interpretation of the facts as a "mess." And that's not to make a value judgment on your opinion, either. But, it is subjective.

with that, i think you've probably summed up my thoughts on about 99.44% of all major news media.

On that we agree.
 
heap
2007-02-02 8:03:51 PM  
Nabb1: Because you agree with the writer's interpretation of the facts as a "mess."

what would you call it?

be as non subjective as possible.

what would you call it when a congressional session refuses to pass financial bills to spite the incoming session?

yes, this is sloppy. i've come to accept sloppy. if i didn't, i'd never get news.
 
Solid State Vittles
2007-02-02 8:05:05 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: This is just unprofessional and lazy.

While this seems to be true, I'd say this does not point out the "liberal media bias" conspiracy alluded to in the headline.

Hey, I gotta be a little contrary.
 
Nabb1
2007-02-02 8:07:53 PM  
heap: what would you call it when a congressional session refuses to pass financial bills to spite the incoming session?

Objectively, I would call it "Congress does not pass financial bills prior to close of session." Then if I called it a "mess" or used words like "to spite," I would expect my editor to strike my opnions and tell me to save it for my editorial piece. And if I kept it up, I would expect to be shipped back down to the obits desk.
 
krelborne
2007-02-02 8:09:18 PM  
"The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget as the wonderful Democrats cleared away the complete financial clusterfark they inherited from the dumbass shiathead Republicans. Thank God."
 
heap
2007-02-02 8:09:56 PM  
Nabb1: Objectively, I would call it "Congress does not pass financial bills prior to close of session."

i spose so long as we don't mention why, it's A-OK. or who, even.

i guess the only way to be objective is to say absolutely nothing.
 
Nabb1
2007-02-02 8:16:13 PM  
heap: i guess the only way to be objective is to say absolutely nothing.

No, not at all. You can say that the Republicans were in control until the end of the last session. That's a fact. You can say the new Democrat-controlled Congress has to take it up in this session. That is also a fact. You can interview members of that Congress from both sides of the aisle for their take on it and report it as such. Reporting that "Congressman Joe Schmoe (D) said, 'The budget situation is a mess. The Republicans did this just to spite the Democrats.'" Then you might, in the interest of fairness, get a Republican's take on it. Just calling it a "mess" is not reporting a fact, though.
 
Iron Felix
2007-02-02 8:19:17 PM  
Vote Libertarian.
 
heap
2007-02-02 8:19:53 PM  
Nabb1: Just calling it a "mess" is not reporting a fact, though.

just describing it as a mess doesn't describe the reason it is a mess. that, i'll agree with.

it doesn't take a congressional interview to call a pile of shiat a pile of shiat, however.
 
deevo
2007-02-02 8:20:21 PM  
There is no financial mess, Iraq is not a civil war, it's totally winnable, the economy is doing great, Wolf Blitzer can't ask Cheney about gay rights ... and Republicans made fun of Saddam's information minister?
 
chuggernaught
2007-02-02 8:20:40 PM  
The same idiots who claim there is a liberal bias to the media are also the ones who say super intellectual things like "Its 14 degrees outside and I'm supposed to believe in global warming."
 
Time Magazine's Person of the Year
2007-02-02 8:20:45 PM  
Curse reality and its anti-Republican bias.
 
Kanemano
2007-02-02 8:23:05 PM  
Iron Felix: Vote Libertarian.

Libertarians are nothing more than anarchist with a get rich quick scheme.
 
F42
2007-02-02 8:24:09 PM  
Like they could ever find any financial wrongdoings in the books of FEMA or the dep of homeland security... let 'em try!
 
Iron Felix
2007-02-02 8:24:46 PM  
Kanemano

As long as they don't bother me, I don't care.
 
Ex-Republican
2007-02-02 8:25:20 PM  
I'm no fan of the Democrats but who the hell still thinks the Republicans are good for anything. They don't even follow through on the values they claim to work for, like smaller government for example.
 
Displayed 50 of 264 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Total access
Total knowledge
Total Fark

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.