Burma

[Alex]

The G&M is a politically correct piece of trash that goes out of their way attempting to never offend anyone. Socialist rag.

The Post has had several articles on Burma, on the front page and others pages for days.. also on the front page was an article about a 7.8 earthquake that has killed tens of thousands in China.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by Alex

The G&M is a politically correct piece of trash that goes out of their way attempting to never offend anyone. Socialist rag.

The Post has had several articles on Burma, on the front page and others pages for days.. also on the front page was an article about a 7.8 earthquake that has killed tens of thousands in China.

i love how being a selfish/insular dick is the cool thing to be as a conservative.

[SWIFTBEATS]

it's also important to remember that burma is a member of the IMF and that officials were told by the IMF that government subsidy of fuel should end which spiked fuel prices in burma by %500, that's why the protests in october happened.

[robyn]

Originally Posted by Alex

The G&M is a politically correct piece of trash that goes out of their way attempting to never offend anyone. Socialist rag.

i agree. clearly the globe and mail is just paying lip service to the liberal, junta-hating status quo while ignoring all the awesome benefits that half a century of military rule has brought to the country.

[SWIFTBEATS]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

if they didn't want all that debt maybe they shouldn't have bought all those weapons to use against their own people from us

i didn't see this.

spoken like a true capitalist sean, i think you know all of the reasons why this statement is complete bullshit but for those who might believe such self serving speach...


"It is estimated that 70 percent of the loans spent on industrialization returned to the coffers of northern financial institutions through transnational corporations, capital flight, arms sales and the northern bank accounts of the tiny southern elite, The disparity between rich and poor that resulted meant that, in order to maintain themselves, Third World regimes turned to repression: up to twenty percent of the loans were lavished on the very unproductive and repressive military sector that was necessary to maintain the power and privilege of local elites."


I don't think that half of the worlds children sitting around starving to death would care much for an argument telling them that the people the north left in charge when they decided it was cheaper to rule from home are responsible for their troubles and therefore it's okay.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by Alex

The G&M is a politically correct piece of trash that goes out of their way attempting to never offend anyone.

.. By telling both sides of the story?

For shame eh? Why can't they be like other fine publications in Canada and offer slanted journalism heavily influenced by wealthy higher powers pulling their editorial staff's strings?

Your criticism of the Globe is so weak it borders on praise.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by miss.myra

all media is biased. period. some of them just have better crosswords than others.

This is akin to saying all cars use gas, and subsequently accusing people driving smart cars and people driving H2s as being equally damaging to the environment.

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by Grapes

This is akin to saying all cars use gas, and subsequently accusing people driving smart cars and people driving H2s as being equally damaging to the environment.

no, it's not.

[Grapes]

Yes, it is.

What you say about all media having bias is technically true, but there are extremeties of bias to which some organizations go to that others do everything they can to avoid. The ideal of "unbiased journalism" may be unattainable, but at least some papers make a fucking effort.

I doubt the owners of the Globe and Mail or The Guardian exert an influence over their staff and content similar to the stranglehold that a Rupert Murdoch or Izzy Asper maintain over their respective outlets.

[P.A.R.T.Y]

I've been shocked at how little coverage there has been on Burma. With so many people dead and missing, I wonder what the response would be if this happened in a 1st world county.

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by Grapes

Yes, it is.

What you say about all media having bias is technically true, but there are extremeties of bias to which some organizations go to that others do everything they can to avoid. The ideal of "unbiased journalism" may be unattainable, but at least some papers make a fucking effort.

I doubt the owners of the Globe and Mail or The Guardian exert an influence over their staff and content similar to the stranglehold that a Rupert Murdoch or Izzy Asper maintain over their respective outlets.

Show me where I said 'all media is biased and nobody makes an effort to make it unbiased', then. By stating all media is biased, I hope you would understand that I certainly did not put the word 'biased' in there as the extreme you outlined in your last paragraph. Just because it's not that extreme, it doesn't mean that it is NOT biased and NOT influenced by a number of factors. As much as I love for the globe and mail (and hey, I happen to work for the company that OWNS that paper) sometimes I have a hard time believing they know Canada exists outside of Ontairo.


so no, it's not like saying what you said before.

atlhough you could drive a hybrid and do a whole lot of other things to be an asshole to the environment. so i guess you were right on that one.

[Erin]

New cyclone forming near devastated Burma

[ebbomega]

Great. Spose they'll announce the re-election polls for tomorrow now?

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by SWIFTBEATS

i didn't see this.

spoken like a true capitalist sean, i think you know all of the reasons why this statement is complete bullshit but for those who might believe such self serving speach...


"It is estimated that 70 percent of the loans spent on industrialization returned to the coffers of northern financial institutions through transnational corporations, capital flight, arms sales and the northern bank accounts of the tiny southern elite, The disparity between rich and poor that resulted meant that, in order to maintain themselves, Third World regimes turned to repression: up to twenty percent of the loans were lavished on the very unproductive and repressive military sector that was necessary to maintain the power and privilege of local elites."


I don't think that half of the worlds children sitting around starving to death would care much for an argument telling them that the people the north left in charge when they decided it was cheaper to rule from home are responsible for their troubles and therefore it's okay.

the belief in universal human rights is also a form of cultural imperialism as it is an entirely western concept.

[SWIFTBEATS]

I'd argue that human rights are inherent to all human beings

[Alex]

Grapes, I always find it humorous when one believes a media outlet is less bias, simply because said outlet's bias/opinions are similiar to the bias said person holds. I've read the Globe many times, and find it extremely bias. On the same note, I find the Post extremely bias. The majority of the articles tend to have a very similiar slant, however, I've found with the Post the two page Editorial section(which many Post writer's frequently express personal opinion's which differ from the Post's, on a daily bases) add's some what of a balance to the Paper. In fact, on the Post's recent israel at 60 feature, they published a full page by Jeet Heer outlining his opinion(in extreme contrast to The Post's) on Israel, defending the Muslim actions and attacking the Israeli actions.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by SWIFTBEATS

I'd argue that human rights are inherent to all human beings

then you are advocating cultural imperialism

[Grapes]

Alex until you can actually manage to use the base word "bias" and its different forms properly, I'm not even starting with you.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by miss.myra

Show me where I said 'all media is biased and nobody makes an effort to make it unbiased', then. By stating all media is biased, I hope you would understand that I certainly did not put the word 'biased' in there as the extreme you outlined in your last paragraph. Just because it's not that extreme, it doesn't mean that it is NOT biased and NOT influenced by a number of factors.

A lot of my interpretation stems from the whole "some just have better crosswords" remark. If you weren't saying all media is biased and concluding that they're therefore all the basically the same, then wtf was that supposed to mean. Do the Globe's attempts to maintain balance add up to a big fat 0 in your books?

[miss.myra]

naw, i love the globe and mail, and the crosswords are quite challenging (oh man that cryptic crossword is the wooorst)....but i'm not really going to take it upon myself to look down on someone because they read 24 hours. The fact of the matter is, a lot of newspapers, the globe and mail and 24 hours included take a lot of their stories from sources like reuters, the associated press, etc. so it's just funny when I see people trying to put people down that read 24 hours.