Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for October 07, 2012

nytimes.com- the editorial and opinion page has a liberal bias but the reporting is thorough and balanced.

Print media gives way to e-media, while e-media trivializes.

how can an opinion page be biased? what do you think an opinion is?

And why are we all indoors?

“… nobody beats [the WSJ’s] news department.”πUrp. Slop. Oh, excuse me.

WSJ = WSU. U = urinal.

In college, my professor- who was a liberal Democrat- used WSJ as an example of good reporting. We used to read articles in the WSJ in our Journalism class.

LWP, when you were taking journalism, the WSJ wasn’t owned by the Rupert Murdoch empire, was it?

LWP, So you don’t expect WSJ news to begin to crumble under the weight of the Murdoch empire? I mean, the reporters may be good, but when a piece of investigative journalism begins to eat into the empire’s interests, isn’t the reporter likely to be fired if she doesn’t back off?

It’s the BAD stuff that merits the GOOD reporting, and the WORSE the behavior is the BETTER the reporting needs to be.

As an inmate I’m paranoid about the administration and staff who are running this asylum.

“In Pravda there is no news, in Izvestia there is no truth.” -old Russian joke (bleak humor).The MSM are owned by (what, either five or six?) huge corporations. The reporters may be humans, but the management is corporate and immortal.Many now get their news from The Daily Show (which is not always humorous), on the Comedy Channel.I was recently sent a link from Breaking The Set, on RT.com; once known as Russia Today, RT’s BTS has cute and refreshing presenters, who in the intro, take a sledge hammer to a TV. Great production values, must be well-funded (keeping in mind, by whom).Who pays the bills, calls the tune, which is why I listen to Pacifica.org stations.

Rob,always thought you were tinkering under your polebarn.

when it comes to telling the straight scoop about where the money is coming from and going to, nobody beats…[the WSJ]

You’ve GOT to be kidding! That couldn’t be further from reality. The WSJ is owned and run by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Faux News. They both have the same blatant disregard for truthful or unbiased reporting. The entire News Corp culture seems to be one of lying and deceit. Murdoch’s publications have been blatantly partisan since 1964 and haven’t changed since.They got caught with their pants down last July in the UK and, although it wasn’t proven that Rupert lied under oath, his son James is still very much suspect. However, you never can convict a billionaire.

Yes, LWP, years ago the WSJ was a fine and respected news source. But since Murdoch bought it in 2007, it is now another partisan rag promoting the party line under the cover of “news”. As a condition of sale, Murdoch promised the Bancroft family (the previous owners), that he would maintain the high quality and standards of the WSJ. His promise lasted about as long as it took for the ink to dry on the sales contract. Most of the Bancrof family now regret selling it to him. Google Murdoch+WSJ+purchase+family for more info.

Likewise the Christian Science Monitor used to be a great newspaper but, sadly, they seem now to only put out trivia and “take this quiz” pap.

The internet has brought publication to the masses but at the cost of some truly great news sources.

If he wants to find out what’s going on in “the world” he just needs to look out his own window and then walk out his own door to see what the non-human world could teach or tell him—what a waste that lovely place seems to be on him.

I used to really like the BBC, but I haven’t seen as much of them since “The Handover” in 1997 as I used to previously. (I live in Hong Kong. ) So I can’t be sure they still stick to the same standards they used to. I have watched Al Jazeera English a few times for major stories, especially those related to the Middle East, and liked their apparent objectivity (which I admit surprised me the first couple of times).

Christian Science monitor.

That’s why I love PBS. they have news, not gossip.

Opinions:http://www.uclick.com/client/spi/dt/2012/10/07/index.html

About 25 years BRM.

Hey, isn’t it time for some racially-motivated troll to attack Obama?

NPR and PBS…. While they last…

Serenity now Mike!

print journalism has been dying for decades.

“There is no truth in News and there is no news in Truth” sounds pithier in Russian.

Print journalism certainly lost its way when they started giving comics the shaft. “The ship is sinking! Quick, throw away the lifeboats!”

I’m not sure that many of the commentators are not missing the point of this strip, and the Jeff Redfern recent ones, that are speaking to the demise of the print press.I don’t rely on my local newspaper for national news but do subscribe ( online )to read about local and state news.Our local paper strives for balance. This is reflected in the Opinions pages, which includes both Conservative and Liberal columnists, daily. The editorials, which tend to pertain to state or local issues, are even-handed and never vituprative.We are lucky to still have an independent daily. It is rare.

I haven’t read them in a while, but my family ued to get three newspapers, The Framingham News, The Boston Globe and The Christian Science Monitor. I liked the CSM because they tried to keep an article on one page instead of breaking it up throughout the paper like some do. Also I liked their international news.

It doesn’t matter if Obama is a socialist or a fascist. They’re both collectivism with only cosmetic differences.

In unison now, “Dear God, Please send us another Walter L. Cronkite, and give us back the kind of news organization which produced him.”

What! no one mentioned Democracy Now? Oh the shame!

“… no one mentioned Democracy Now?”πDN kicks asterisk.

The answer is listen to NPR.

Where have the racist trolls gone?Slavering to attack the PresidentBehind self-righteous masks?

One racist troll, for instance, is attacking President Obama behind a self-righteous Constitutional mask.

Yes, and it could also be the opinion of the person signing the paychecks.

http://www.legitgov.org/

Reality has no bias.

Hey guys. Good strip today and really decent comments.>>DTPI—Youasked me Friday if I speak the same wayall the time. No, Sometimes I get a little hystrionic. What I am is passionate about us becoming a country that truly cares for one another. That means I will call out anyone who is failing to care about country first. If all one can do is to pounce on the first disagreeable thing he sees, and shoot pointed and poisonous barbs then they need calling out. If someone is, apparantly, just labeling without thought, they need calling out.PI, you asked me how many do I think post and read on Dunesbury. Doesn’t matter. I read and post on other placesas well. And, trust me, what I do is not about popularity. I do this for the bully pulpit. I’m not crazy enough to think my ideas are RIGHT. I am satisfied that I own a certain measure of TRUTH and you do to. All of us on here have some of the truh in us and maybe a few have much more(not I). It is this co-mingling of thought that I search for.If we cannot even make sane discussions, but rather attacks and snipes, our country is doomed. What we do here is simply a small part of what goes on outside the computers. And yes, I also discuss my thoughts with friends and neighbors. Also, strangers like at truck stops when I am parked for a while waiting for a load.>>Now, for a comedic turn from my rants, I copied the address of a comic I get a ARCOMAX. I will paste it here>>http://www.arcamax.com/ezinesamples/429.html>> Hope all have a blessed day, or night.

“… I will call out anyone who is failing to care about country first.”πHow do you know who’s failing and who isn’t?

Radish, that Russian proverb makes more sense when you know “truth” in Russian is “Pravda,” the name of the Soviet Union newspaper.

I believe you have the truth of it there. I’m not saying who I will vote for until I vote. But, eberytime someone questions the President they are quickly labeled. Sorry folks, I’m neither racist nor xenophobic. But, I reserve the right to question, authority or opinion. >> All we can do here is offer opinion. Hopefully, we will have a bit of truth to share. But there is one problem with opinions. They are just like anuses. Everybody has one and they usually stink.My apoligies to Gunnery Sergeant Washington, USMC.

I fully agree with you on this one. I feel that my service in the USMC was for nought if even our leadership is against the good of the country. I am not completely convinced that Pres Obama is against us but before I vote I will be as informed as I can be.>>Re my post above about opinions go here: http://www.arcamax.com/ezinesamples/428.html

“… If Obama is a Socialist, Marxist, Communist, Islamist or a Dingbatist… IT DOES MATTER!! Our President MUST be an AMERICAN in EVERY SENSE if the word.. EVERY SENSE!!!!!”π“Masking” means fearful of being truthful and daring to add “black” to the list.

In a racist’s opinion a black man can’t possibly "be an AMERICAN in EVERY SENSE if the word.. EVERY SENSE!!!!!”

If ever there was a U.S. President who qualified for the label “dingbatist”, it was surely George W. Bush. Yet the reich wing never ever created such a list as “Socialist, Marxist, Communist, Islamist or a Dingbatist…” for him. Go figure.

If one draws “the race card” that is in the poker deck and one fails to play it when appropriate, then . . . .

This country that we love is too great to be governed by a man who was born in Kenya, isn’t it?

“Next up on Fox News … Obama: fascist or socialist? YOU decide!”

Fascist, socialist, Marxist, communist, Islamist, dingbatist — When one attacks Obama without grounds, without credible evidence, upon which to rest one’s case, then there is every possibility that the word “black” is being masked out. Even if unconsciously. Because sometimes the mask slips and a revealing part of the ugly face of racism appears. Even if only for a moment.πHe who hath ears let him hear; he who hath eyes let him see.

classic American English: folding a newspaper, as Romney would say

Wow, will the comments never cease? @ TimeWeaver. OK, I agree about Comeday Central. But the BBC is becoming like the mainstream media. NPR has changed too. Now it’s mostly entertainment, with little real news. The closest to informative news, albeit with a progressive slant, is The Guardian. Of course it has a progressive slant because it caters to intelligent readers.

Good joke, “the newspaper folded.”