The media, once again

[the middle]

Hello,
Every morning I watch the news on the net.
Every day, I see that the majority of information is copied and pasted.
By chance, I came across a recent video, which nobody is talking about.
This is very important information, who is hiding what?
It concerns the Pope's trip to Germany.
No need for sound, the image speaks for itself.
http://viens-seigneur-jesus.forumactif. ... in-au-pape
This video is taken at random on google, I just typed Pope shake hands, and I took the first video, so the site, I don't care

[stipe]

Very important info ...? from an economic point of view?

Ah really, we are hiding everything, we are told nothing

[the middle]

Very important info ...? from an economic point of view?

Ah really, we are hiding everything, we are told nothing

Precisely, if the information is sorted, centralized, and then distributed, the ecology cannot evolve quickly.
Make an intense pub for an air car, unprofitable, the, the big brothers are very strong

[Flytox]

I seem to turn to the fossil this one too

[Obamot]

Hello,
Every morning I watch the news on the net.
Every day, I see that the majority of information is copied and pasted.

...and yes ! This already dates from the time of the teletypewriter, where the newspaper journalists in the editorial offices were content to be seated next to the telexes, and spent their time rewriting the news from the big agencies: AFP, AP, ATS, Reuters, Novosti, New China and so many others, to name a few.

Thus there is little investigative journalism outside these large agencies, which are few in number:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_d%27 ... _de_presse

The basic rule is to cite the source! But in recent years, the news has been less and less rewritten.

[Obamot]

... but I think the most staggering is the incompetence of most journalists in the news areas they are supposed to cover. An assessment should be made, but it must be between 95% and 99% ... Because the title of reporter does not guarantee the prerequisites that the special envoy has to cover a news item (if indeed it is sent to square...)

So we see it very well in medicine or in prevention, we have journalists who obviously do not ask the right questions, simply because personally they know almost nothing ... or too little (they read themselves agency dispatches ...) you can see every day, looking at the newspapers or reading the press: how their knowledge is very incomplete!

So when it comes to "sensitive" subjects such as in renewable energies, the economy or worse, nuclear, they are dropped, we can tell them anything!

So when they come across a university teacher to support their hypotheses of investigation, when the latter is not impartial (see biased), they do not have the skills to notice ...

[Janic]

Journalists are like ministers, they are supposed to be competent whatever the position they occupy!

[the middle]

And here is an article which confirms my statements:
http://www.mondialisation.ca/index.php? ... &aid=26801

[clasou]

a + claude

[Obamot]

Yes, that's the classic debate ... But today with the multiplication of sources, it becomes untenable!

Hello everyone,
For those who are journalists, I don't think they should know the subject.If they make investigations, it does not arrive at the end, that with a synthesis of what they will have seen, or of what one will have presented to them as true.
See what is removed (syndrome I can not find the name), which after a while, force to hear their captors, who have no reason to try to convince them. facts are not necessarily what he believed.

Is that so? Journalists specializing in the stock market and finance should not "know their subject"? Those of the weather or sport either? Those who do in foreign policy either? Since when?
In short, whatever you think, it is part of the "hiring criteria"!

The fundamental question is the credibility of the news. It is that with the advent of the internet, the “information receptors” (all of us) we ask what it can be used for, if:
- its degree of credibility is variable (in particular due to a lack of sufficient knowledge)
- the information is not followed by "action" in the field, in which case it would be de facto validated by "something concrete".
- the sources of information regularly give us necessarily contradictory versions, leaving us in the difficulty of forming our opinion, since WE THE CONSUMERS OF INFO, are not specialists and should be able to count on journalists to enlighten us as they should do it.

This is one of the reasons why there is a global press crisis!

Providing adequate information is part of the code of ethics: it is a duty towards those to whom the information is intended. Just as politicians should have a duty to serve the best interests of fellow citizens ...

We are in a frightening context, where many flee their responsibility.

Of course the latter can be motivated indirectly by people who have been indirectly oriented themselves.

Here it is no longer a question of skills but of intellectual and moral honesty ...

To come back to my workhorse, when you are in a department it is up to you to make your choice, if you buy a product that you are told is good, but after eating it you have a stomach ache .
You still have to make a choice and take the best adviser.

It's really too simplistic ... It's already been ages since we know that harmful long-term products are allowed in food ... That we feed animals with products banned for human consumption , but why are herds of livestock eligible for it? Why are we allowing neurotoxic insecticides that kill bees, for example? To believe that free will "the law of the market" will solve this type of problem is a utopia, widely promoted by large industrial groups.

To make the link between just oil and oil, if you change your way of doing things and the others too, wood heating, bicycle, solar cooker oven ...
May matter where oil comes from and how much it costs.

... we are still waiting for the one who spent thousands of euros to drive a car to leave it in the garage ...