Silver Adept (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
silveradept) wrote2006-04-28 11:27 pm
silveradept) wrote2006-04-28 11:27 pm
Location change complete.
Moved in without a hitch. Other than the desk I thought that would be appearing didn't. Oh, well, have cobbled together method of having connectivity, viewing, and a reasonably ergonomic typing and mousing experience. Much practice in setting up a system where there's no real room is always a plus. Anyway, so I'm now in the new place - the room's smaller, definitely, but no roommate, and the people that are here should be much more awesome. We're just glad to be moving on.
There's a cloud of controversy surrounding the recording and playing of a Spanish-language national anthem . "Nuestro Himno" is intended as a statement of solidarity for immigrants, presumably both those with legal documentation and those without. It also can be interpreted as a way of trying to make sure that immigrants don't assimilate into the American culture (some days, the culture looks pretty bad, so I can see why some might resist).
This article has what I consider a pretty good lesson in media bias today (or at least, in how an article can be constructed to support one position over another while still reporting facts or their close facsimiles) Consider the following quote, given as support for the position that "Nuestro Himno" is a bad thing because it stops assimilation:
"I'm really appalled. . . . We are not a bilingual nation," said George Taplin, director of the Virginia Chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, part of a national countermovement that emphasizes border control and tougher enforcement, and objects to public funding for day-laborer sites. "When people are talking about becoming a part of this country, they should assimilate to the norm that's already here," Taplin said. "What we're talking about here is a sovereign nation with our ideals and our national identity, and that [anthem] is one of the icons of our nation's identity. I believe it should be in English as it was penned."
An interesting choice, certainly, to be the face of the opposition, wouldn't you say? Not a scholar, not a politician, not a figure of any influence, but someone who can probably be rightly dismissed as unimportant and uninformed. Which, I believe, is exactly the point. There are no factual errors in that quote, assuming it is accurate, yet it clearly communicates what the reader should think. Of course, this may be grasping at straws on my part. As for whether I agree with it or not, I'd probably need a good translation and some time to think on it.
Regarding my biases, well, they probably show through, even if I do try to be objective on an issue. I'm confident that my readership is smart enough to recognize them and to consider them in the light of their own knowledge and position. My bias may not be your bias, but between us, we can probably figure out what the truth really is. Although, you should really think, and think hard, on this question when considering bias: What Do You Think of Your Opponents?
In other materials, I remember watching a video some time ago about a reporter whose microphone cord ended up causing a can sculpture to crash in a spectacular fashion. Here's a page of ones that have survived journalists. Shows the power of co-operation, that individually, things seem meaningless, but collectively, they form a nice picture.
One of the hallmarks of a crack-shot whatever, be he lawman, outlaw, sci-fi, western, police drama, whatever,is that he can either shoot a gun out of someone's hand, or shoot a bullet down the barrel of his opponent's gun. Well, in one of those cases of fiction meeting reality, a police officer accomplished the bullet-down-barrel trick. Nice shootin', Tex.
In the "Candid Camera" department, this photo and accompanying caption of the Speaker of the House returning to his SUV after leaving a press conference in a hydrogen-powered car says more than the 1000 words allotted. Any guesses on how long this photographer will be keeping his job before being fired under mysterious circumstances? Of course, it could have been a publicity stunt in the first place, which makes things worse. Has similar overtones to something like the FDA's experts having conflicts of interest on drug approvals. Now, we realize that such conflicts are unavoidable for some, but how many actually declare theirs every time they have to?
Not to mention a story of Homeland Security agents acting more like thugs than officers of the law. If you're going to be charged with law enforcement, thuggery should be on your list of things not to do, especially in front of an elementary school. Gives the bullies ammunition.
So, from my new location, this is all for tonight.
There's a cloud of controversy surrounding the recording and playing of a Spanish-language national anthem . "Nuestro Himno" is intended as a statement of solidarity for immigrants, presumably both those with legal documentation and those without. It also can be interpreted as a way of trying to make sure that immigrants don't assimilate into the American culture (some days, the culture looks pretty bad, so I can see why some might resist).
This article has what I consider a pretty good lesson in media bias today (or at least, in how an article can be constructed to support one position over another while still reporting facts or their close facsimiles) Consider the following quote, given as support for the position that "Nuestro Himno" is a bad thing because it stops assimilation:
"I'm really appalled. . . . We are not a bilingual nation," said George Taplin, director of the Virginia Chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, part of a national countermovement that emphasizes border control and tougher enforcement, and objects to public funding for day-laborer sites. "When people are talking about becoming a part of this country, they should assimilate to the norm that's already here," Taplin said. "What we're talking about here is a sovereign nation with our ideals and our national identity, and that [anthem] is one of the icons of our nation's identity. I believe it should be in English as it was penned."
An interesting choice, certainly, to be the face of the opposition, wouldn't you say? Not a scholar, not a politician, not a figure of any influence, but someone who can probably be rightly dismissed as unimportant and uninformed. Which, I believe, is exactly the point. There are no factual errors in that quote, assuming it is accurate, yet it clearly communicates what the reader should think. Of course, this may be grasping at straws on my part. As for whether I agree with it or not, I'd probably need a good translation and some time to think on it.
Regarding my biases, well, they probably show through, even if I do try to be objective on an issue. I'm confident that my readership is smart enough to recognize them and to consider them in the light of their own knowledge and position. My bias may not be your bias, but between us, we can probably figure out what the truth really is. Although, you should really think, and think hard, on this question when considering bias: What Do You Think of Your Opponents?
In other materials, I remember watching a video some time ago about a reporter whose microphone cord ended up causing a can sculpture to crash in a spectacular fashion. Here's a page of ones that have survived journalists. Shows the power of co-operation, that individually, things seem meaningless, but collectively, they form a nice picture.
One of the hallmarks of a crack-shot whatever, be he lawman, outlaw, sci-fi, western, police drama, whatever,is that he can either shoot a gun out of someone's hand, or shoot a bullet down the barrel of his opponent's gun. Well, in one of those cases of fiction meeting reality, a police officer accomplished the bullet-down-barrel trick. Nice shootin', Tex.
In the "Candid Camera" department, this photo and accompanying caption of the Speaker of the House returning to his SUV after leaving a press conference in a hydrogen-powered car says more than the 1000 words allotted. Any guesses on how long this photographer will be keeping his job before being fired under mysterious circumstances? Of course, it could have been a publicity stunt in the first place, which makes things worse. Has similar overtones to something like the FDA's experts having conflicts of interest on drug approvals. Now, we realize that such conflicts are unavoidable for some, but how many actually declare theirs every time they have to?
Not to mention a story of Homeland Security agents acting more like thugs than officers of the law. If you're going to be charged with law enforcement, thuggery should be on your list of things not to do, especially in front of an elementary school. Gives the bullies ammunition.
So, from my new location, this is all for tonight.
no subject
need address ;)
no subject
Homeland Security knows it's only got 3 years max before it's completely dismantled, they're getting their fun in now.
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2006-04-29 02:09 pm (UTC)(link)http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4956834.stm
This was not on the editorial page. Note two items in particular:
1. Charles Key was not holding, but fondling the manuscript.
2. Bush "stumbled on the word English but the point was taken."
As I said, I don't want to debate the rights and wrongs of reporting without complete objectivity. I've just woken up, and it's too early for that. I just want to say that the author made me giggle, and that's a good start to my day.
no subject
no subject
I am intrigued by the shootout. The shot turns out to be dumb luck, but is still a one-in-a-million chance. Yet the officers, who were left with no other resort than to use deadly force (standard police rules of engagement when a person pulls a weapon), they are on adminsitrative leave? There is something wrong with the Seattle police IAB.
Have the best
-=TK
no subject
Most places I've heard about when ever a death occurs with an officer firing a weapon they immediatly get put on leave until the matter is investigated. After that there's usually a period where they have to go through X number of hours counciling before they can come back.
no subject
The Spanish, if they have translated the US anthem, definitely wish to be part of the USA, but they still want to keep their language and traditions. That sounds very reasonable to me.
As for my opponants. In some way, conservatives and Christians are opponants, yet I get on very well with many of them and respect their intelligence in many cases. Its just a matter of different personality types. With other opponants I'm less sympathetic.
This area is split betweemn the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru. I support the Lib Dems tentatively because while I support Welsh nationalism and bilingualism as an official Union Policy I don't like the fact that their form of nationalism seems very protectionist and not very multicultural. In that situation, I have full respect for my opponants.
Its nice to live in an area where both the main parties are good.
no subject