This applies to the entire forum: In light of recent revelations, I cannot help but feel that it is time to curb topics and/or comments that discuss people in a sexual manner. I feel that it contributes towards sexual assault. I hereby respectfully request that that any subjects posted here which border on sexual objectification of anybody be deleted. Thank you.
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.pictures.zimbio.com%2Fbg%2FHR%2BGiger%2BPrometheus%2BWorld%2BPremiere%2BAfter%2BParty%2BMVDh1UoPzfil.jpg&hash=64fbaae19406f6c4881d014066f797482a2d1652)
You're saying this on a forum of goddamn sexual tyrannosauruses...
Joking aside, don't worry, saying "that person's sexy" doesn't contribute to sexual assault. What contributes to sexual assault is a sick mind that lacks self control and puts perverted thoughts into action.
If by these revelations, you're talking about the amount of sexual assault/harassment news cropping up lately. Sadly that is due to a lot of these sick predatory bastards who rise to the position to exploit people. Hollywood and politics are shady f**ked up businesses with some dodgy people in them. Power, fame, money etc tend to attract empathetically challenged individuals.
I doubt most people on this forum are like that. I like to believe that they have more self-control than those rich predatory creeps.
Kari Byron is sexy.
Does this thread get deleted now?
guilty conscience :laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=58871.msg2249656#msg2249656
Quote from: Never say no to Panda! on Nov 11, 2017, 10:32:42 PM
guilty conscience :laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=58871.msg2249656#msg2249656
EJA, did I just read this right? Did you say someone was sexy? How could you contribute to sexual assault like that? I mean, I was just joking, but you went and objectified someone for real.
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 11, 2017, 10:51:55 PM
Quote from: Never say no to Panda! on Nov 11, 2017, 10:32:42 PM
guilty conscience :laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=58871.msg2249656#msg2249656
EJA, did I just read this right? Did you say someone was sexy? How could you contribute to sexual assault like that? I mean, I was just joking, but you went and objectified someone for real.
Uh oh! :laugh:
what happened? i know the debates here can get pretty heated but what are you even talking about?
"in light of recent revelations"
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/44/4d/76/444d763745d945c1dcc9e1cd85ac9c13--seinfeld-quotes-jerry-seinfeld.jpg)
Quote from: Never say no to Panda! on Nov 11, 2017, 10:32:42 PM
guilty conscience :laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=58871.msg2249656#msg2249656
I guess this is too good to be actually for real. :D ::)
Then again there are people...
Quote from: Never say no to Panda! on Nov 11, 2017, 10:32:42 PM
guilty conscience :laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=58871.msg2249656#msg2249656
RO-RO-RO-RO-ROASTED
Maybe the OP's just being sarcastic?
But on the other end of the spectrum; what if you do want to be sexually harassed? It is a fetishist to some. Who's to protect their rights as citizens? I mean I don't do all those sit ups* for nothing you know.
*disclaimer: I don't actually do sit ups.
Till the day we will all need to carry a personal digitized lawyer to legalize all speech and conducted with another person.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 06:35:03 AM
Till the day we will all need to carry a personal digitized lawyer to legalize all speech and conducted with another person.
Wait, are you saying that's a bad idea?
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 06:35:03 AM
Maybe the OP's just being sarcastic?
Guess so...HOPE so. Even if it's no the case he should at least claim so.
There are not many other ways to solve the situation if he is not gay...baptizm might work as well to leave it all behind.
Or maybe his girlfriend joined the board...so he wants to get rid of his old thread :D
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 06:35:03 AM
But on the other end of the spectrum; what if you do want to be sexually harassed?
It's not harassment if you want it.
But it depends, some people are into really freaky shit.
Yeah, real talk, the kink world is pretty diverse, but rape fantasies are surprisingly common. Still, it's about as far removed from actual sexual harassment as GTA5 is from actual car theft.
Seriously though, telling people what they should and shouldn't talk about based on your personal feelings is incredibly sanctimonious, and over something as normal and harmless as sexual attraction. When did it become objectification to say someone was sexy? There are people whose entire livelihoods are based on their sexual appeal, something that's cheapened and dismissed every time some little flake tries to protect them from peoples reaction. It's outright Puritanical.
That, and... well, let's say I have a hard time trusting someone who thinks objectification is that easy. Makes me think they're not quite in control of their own urges.
Well by some peoples definitions; flirting would be considered sexual harassment. Which dosen't sound like a fun place to live. Although I remember watching a show where people didn't think saying "hey, flat chest" was offensive but then a girl reminded them that the poor girl may have heard that 100 times in the past week. Making what some think is nothing more than an annoyance into a fairly traumatic psychological blow. Every person may not mean or understand the effects of little gestures like that but it does all add up. Like calling someone fatso. Sure, sticks and stones and all but it is possible that a fat kid could hear such a thing 30 times a day. So I don't know, I think handing out public lashings for butt slaps could be an option instead of automatic life long registered sex offender standing.
What you guys think? Where's the line? Is the line murky? Could a good old whipping be more effective? Singapore loves to cane people. I'd be alright with caning. Give the pervs something to think about.
Oh and by lashing I don't mean you'd start off with drawing bloody body horror. You work your way up. Maybe start off with a ruler to the knuckles or a flat board.
QuoteWhere's the line?
Where the mods say it is.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 11:50:35 AM
Well by some peoples definitions; flirting would be considered sexual harassment. Which dosen't sound like a fun place to live. Although I remember watching a show where people didn't think saying "hey, flat chest" was offensive but then a girl reminded them that the poor girl may have heard that 100 times in the past week. Making what some think is nothing more than an annoyance into a fairly traumatic psychological blow. Every person may not mean or understand the effects of little gestures like that but it does all add up. Like calling someone fatso. Sure, sticks and stones and all but it is possible that a fat kid could hear such a thing 30 times a day. So I don't know, I think handing out public lashings for butt slaps could be an option instead of automatic life long registered sex offender standing.
What you guys think? Where's the line? Is the line murky? Could a good old whipping be more effective? Singapore loves to cane people. I'd be alright with caning. Give the pervs something to think about.
Oh and by lashing I don't mean you'd start off with drawing bloody body horror. You work your way up. Maybe start off with a ruler to the knuckles or a flat board.
Great post! (if im actually getting it right lol --)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fidyllopuspress.com%2Fidyllopus%2Ffilm%2Fimages%2Fco%2Fco_revenge.jpg&hash=9a30c48dbc57c6c15eff2c87a630e9979b086fbf)
Quote from: SM on Nov 12, 2017, 08:14:30 PM
QuoteWhere's the line?
Where the mods say it is.
That wasn't the line I meant. :P I was talking about the line that defines what is and what is not sexual harassment. At which point does looking at a girl warrant the charge.
hmm the mods are pretty strict here though. Sometimes I swear they can read our minds! I bet right now Hicks is hiding in the ceiling tiles!
Quote from: EJA on Nov 11, 2017, 05:57:32 PM
This applies to the entire forum: In light of recent revelations, I cannot help but feel that it is time to curb topics and/or comments that discuss people in a sexual manner. I feel that it contributes towards sexual assault. I hereby respectfully request that that any subjects posted here which border on sexual objectification of anybody be deleted. Thank you.
Everything about this post is wrong.
Why?
QuoteAt which point does looking at a girl warrant the charge.
When it goes beyond simply looking and becomes staring. I daresay most people with basic social skills know where that line is, even if they choose to ignore it.
Harassment is generally sustained.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 11:50:35 AM
I remember watching a show where people didn't think saying "hey, flat chest" was offensive but then a girl reminded them that the poor girl may have heard that 100 times in the past week. Making what some think is nothing more than an annoyance into a fairly traumatic psychological blow.
It's completely unfeasible to hold individual straw accountable for a camels broken back, and even if you wanted to do that, it's not going to stop future camels from carrying a big load. People say nasty shit, it sucks, but ya can't pre-emptively punish an individual for what a group of unrelated individuals may have done.
So people are absolved for shit behaviour if enough people do the same thing before them?
That's what it sounds like and I'm really hoping you've just used an awful analogy.
It certainly does sound like that and it's wrong. Regardless of how many times something like that is said, it's not something that should be said, especially when it's used in a derogatory manner. Come-on, it's basic common sense and nothing to do with snowflakes or any such stuff.
In regards to the initial post - I wasn't aware this kind of behaviour was prevalent? If you have an issue with any threads or posts, please report it. If the moderating team believes there's an issue, we'll intervene.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 12, 2017, 06:35:03 AM
Maybe the OP's just being sarcastic?
Could be.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs2.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F28%2F283e8f9b42a671ac824e2d349658f2d2d45d9f3e7f57c729f3f05720fb741cc2.jpg&hash=d3be60846ad59ba1c8d9e69abd361db4c4083ec2)
Quote from: SiL on Nov 13, 2017, 07:32:53 AM
So people are absolved for shit behaviour if enough people do the same thing before them?
Did I say they're absolved? No. I'm saying someone saying to me my hair makes me look like a girl is guilty of telling me my hair makes me look like a girl. They're one person, guilty of one thing, and may inadvertently contribute to a greater stress. That's not something they can be expected to know about. My invisible stresses are not on them.
Are we really at the point where saying "You're not guilty for what other people say" means "Anyone can say anything and they're absolved?" How about we just advocate for not being c**ts to people in general? Or does that translate to something else now?
People can't be expected to know, no.
But they can be expected to think. Empathy and compassion.
QuoteAre we really at the point where saying "You're not guilty for what other people say" means "Anyone can say anything and they're absolved?"
You used an analogy that muddied what would have been a simple point otherwise. I didn't honestly think you were saying that, hence using the next sentence (that you left out of your response) to hope for a clarification. Which you provided. Sweet. Nobody was attacking you, no need to get so shitty about it.
Quote from: SiL on Nov 13, 2017, 12:16:25 PM
People can't be expected to know, no.
But they can be expected to think. Empathy and compassion.
I didn't think my original post contested that in any way.
Quote from: SiL on Nov 13, 2017, 12:16:25 PM
You used an analogy that muddied what would have been a simple point otherwise. I didn't honestly think you were saying that, hence using the next sentence (that you left out of your response) to hope for a clarification. Which you provided.
What was wrong with the analogy? How did it imply that the last straw is absolved for shit behavior?
Quote from: SiL on Nov 13, 2017, 12:16:25 PMNobody was attacking you, no need to get so shitty about it.
I didn't think they were.
Discussions are supposed to muddy the waters.
Now on to Bush 41 and his dirty Jokes and butt grabs. He's a man of power but also in a wheel chair and old as dust for a while now. Plus for his generation that is normal play. It's rude and if he got slapped that would be fair game. However sexual harassment? I don't think it is. Still though, why doesn't anyone tell people who do something that they don't like to go to hell anymore? Is it because back then it wasn't considered a big deal or perhaps the repercussions. Still so many people don't say anything even though they have every right too. If people would nip this shit in the butt it would have saved a lot of people from similar acts. Pardon the pun.
Also don't shoot me, I'm just posing a question.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.com%2Fr%2F0rWjyj9.gif&hash=f7f30ed14c366b948a9e8daf7d9daf304843b17f)
This conversation. On a forum with a 1600 page thread entitled "Who is your favorite hot woman / who are you gay for?"
QuoteHowever sexual harassment? I don't think it is. Still though, why doesn't anyone tell people who do something that they don't like to go to hell anymore? Is it because back then it wasn't considered a big deal or perhaps the repercussions.
The latter.
If you object or complain, particularly if you're a woman, you can often get instantly labelled as someone who is difficult and doesn't know how to take a joke.
And often this is because the perpetrators don't have the faintest clue on how to read a room or situation. I can use choice language around some of my co-workers (generally women) because I know they won't take offence and will tell me if they do. I can't use the same language around other co-workers that I don't know as well. If I do, and they take offence, then that's on me for not using appropriate language - not them because they can't take a joke.
Bush Snr grabbing arse could be classed as harassment in pretty much every situation where the arse being grabbed doesn't belong to someone with whom he's in an intimate relationship.
Quote from: SM on Nov 14, 2017, 10:38:19 AM
Bush Snr grabbing arse could be classed as harassment in pretty much every situation where the arse being grabbed doesn't belong to someone with whom he's in an intimate relationship.
I don't agree with this. You can be sexually harassed by someone you are in an intimate relationship and you can have consensual physical contact with those you are not. A relationship isn't a contract that determines that you own your partner and can do whatever you want with them. Personal boundaries are a massive factor here and it differs wildly between individuals.
I think the safest bet is to simply not be a jerk and have a decent set of boundaries around folks you don't know well enough, or if you do know them then to just think further than your nose.
Yea but if you are not a perfect person, should you burn in hell for grabbing someones ass without permission? I mean does the act of being an ass man disqualify you from being an active member of society?
Another thing, what is so wrong with touching an ass check. You slap a kid on the ass no one bats an eye, you slap an adult on the butt and everyone losses their mind. Of course there is a wide range of intent here, from horseplay to full on harassment. I don't slap ass because it's rude and weird but it's still just an ass.
QuoteI don't agree with this. You can be sexually harassed by someone you are in an intimate relationship and you can have consensual physical contact with those you are not.
Note my use of 'pretty much every situation'. Of course there will be exceptions.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 18, 2017, 12:30:20 PM
Yea but if you are not a perfect person, should you burn in hell for grabbing someones ass without permission? I mean does the act of being an ass man disqualify you from being an active member of society?
Another thing, what is so wrong with touching an ass check. You slap a kid on the ass no one bats an eye, you slap an adult on the butt and everyone losses their mind. Of course there is a wide range of intent here, from horseplay to full on harassment. I don't slap ass because it's rude and weird but it's still just an ass.
You're continual use of extremes suggests you don't want to have a serious discussion.
Just posing the question on why touching a buttocks is bad. And yes there are extremes. Doing it to intimidate someone is wrong but a quick grab out of horseplay doesn't seem bad. Being grabbed from behind on the shoulder is far more aggressive in my opinion. Being grabbed by the waist too. It is also not illegal or really frowned upon in most places to walk with your ass checks hanging out.
Plus the question still stands, should you be disqualified for having done it. Unfit to hold office or lead a bunch of kids on a picnic... if you want another set of extremes. Plus that's the whole point. The extremes of the intent.
The repercussions vary depending on what you did and who you did it to.
Many will raise eye brows for smacking a child.
If you make a habit out of grabbing asses, perhaps you should be disqualified from society.
Many don't lose their mind for slapping an adult on the butt.
You can't take a single situation out of its context and have a one-size-fits-all response.
Yea that's how I see it. There is no one size fits all response. Which puts Franken on the petty side of things. I don't really care for the guy but I don't see the comparison to Roy Moore at all. Still spanking a child is considered normal here as long as it isn't overtly violent.
Yes, Franken and Moore aren't comparable. But Franken doesn't get a pass for not chasing after 14 year olds.
Ben Affleck the other night on The Late Show addresses what men in Hollywood can, and need, to do better. I really agree with him.
When I was in the States, I was touched on the butt by an American woman while standing in line on the stairs. Since she was with her bf at that time, I assumed that it was an accident.
And add Charlie Rose to the list for "unwanted sexual advances," which he admitted inappropriate behavior.
Edit: Oops, I missed the thread where this was already reported.
Anyway........It's like a war has been declared in the entertainment and political arenas.
No. Not war. Just a fad that will eventually fade into obscurity cometh the next disaster.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 21, 2017, 10:43:24 PM
No. Not war. Just a fad that will eventually fade into obscurity cometh the next disaster.
I don't believe it's just a passing thing. Especially with the consistent new revelations of sexual inappropriateness of different actors in Hollywood. It only seems to be getting worse.
Quote from: Chronicle on Nov 23, 2017, 05:08:49 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 21, 2017, 10:43:24 PM
No. Not war. Just a fad that will eventually fade into obscurity cometh the next disaster.
I don't believe it's just a passing thing. Especially with the consistent new revelations of sexual inappropriateness of different actors in Hollywood. It only seems to be getting worse.
Honestly, the whole Listen and Believe mentality worries me. I'm pretty sure that majority of this inquisition is legitimate, and a long time coming, but I do worry that people will start to abuse the readiness to believe these kinds of accusations. Seems like exactly the kind of scummy tactics that Hollywood could resettle into after it's old scummy tactics are routed out.
There have been women who have made false accusations, yes. They can be caught out, though.
The power of social media nowadays. You can be named and shamed for life.
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 23, 2017, 10:27:20 PM
There have been women who have made false accusations, yes. They can be caught out, though.
The power of social media nowadays. You can be named and shamed for life.
Yeah, that's the problem. No one should be able to toss an accusation out to social media and watch the dominos fall, even if it's just "You're lying", and especially when it comes to claims that already have the potential to destroy someone's life. Social media is not where these things should play out. You're right that a false accuser can be found out as well, but I'd say the deck is stacked in their favour, at least when it comes to the public (not even going to open the worm can that is the legal system and whatever bias may exist there). Now, I know that the percentage of accusations that turn out to be false is quite low, but when the success rate rises and the repercussions shrink, then doesn't it follow the frequency will increase?
Maybe I'm completely off in that, I'm just worried that rape accusations will turn into social leverage. That's bad for everyone.
Is it a big problem, though?
Because such accusations would lack credibility.
Particularly if multiple people come forward. Removes much doubt.
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 01:49:27 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 01:48:22 AM
Is it a big problem, though?
As I said, not yet.
You don't think the Sexual improprieties are a problem yet in Hollywood?
Quote from: Chronicle on Nov 24, 2017, 02:53:12 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 01:49:27 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 01:48:22 AM
Is it a big problem, though?
As I said, not yet.
You don't think the Sexual improprieties are a problem yet in Hollywood?
I assumed Scorpion was referring to false accusations when he asked if it was a big problem. My answer was towards that. If he meant the current sexual harassment accusations, then I addressed that here.
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 23, 2017, 07:07:25 PMI'm pretty sure that majority of this inquisition is legitimate, and a long time coming-
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 03:00:47 AM
Quote from: Chronicle on Nov 24, 2017, 02:53:12 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 01:49:27 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 01:48:22 AM
Is it a big problem, though?
As I said, not yet.
You don't think the Sexual improprieties are a problem yet in Hollywood?
I assumed Scorpion was referring to false accusations when he asked if it was a big problem. My answer was towards that. If he meant the current sexual harassment accusations, then I addressed that here.
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 23, 2017, 07:07:25 PMI'm pretty sure that majority of this inquisition is legitimate, and a long time coming-
Ok good :)
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 01:49:27 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 01:48:22 AM
Is it a big problem, though?
As I said, not yet.
I've only heard of this happening once. The girl was charged.
I'm sure it has happened more times, but the question is why would the girl or guy make false accusations?
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 06:49:40 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 01:49:27 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 24, 2017, 01:48:22 AM
Is it a big problem, though?
As I said, not yet.
I've only heard of this happening once. The girl was charged.
I'm sure it has happened more times, but the question is why would the girl or guy make false accusations?
It's the ability to offhandedly destroy a career by appealing to the publics desire for justice. That has to be pretty appealing to a certain type of person. And considering we're talking about Hollywood, I don't think it's hard to imagine a scenario where rape accusations are used to further your career or tear down others.
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 24, 2017, 11:27:22 AM
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
You have a much higher opinion of the state of journalism than I.
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 07:08:16 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 24, 2017, 11:27:22 AM
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
You have a much higher opinion of the state of journalism than I.
Agreed. Just some light investigation reveals that double checking or validating sources is not really a priority for many journalists. It's about the headline.
Quote from: razeak on Nov 25, 2017, 05:09:15 AM
Quote from: Sabby on Nov 24, 2017, 07:08:16 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 24, 2017, 11:27:22 AM
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
You have a much higher opinion of the state of journalism than I.
Agreed. Just some light investigation reveals that double checking or validating sources is not really a priority for many journalists. It's about the headline.
Didn't the producer of CNN get caught saying as much on a hidden cam? Called journalistic ethics 'adorable', if I recall correctly.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 24, 2017, 11:27:22 AM
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
This (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/business/media/rolling-stone-retracts-article-on-rape-at-university-of-virginia.html) immediately sprang to mind. Although I'm sure there are other instances, and sure, it may not qualify as your definition of "credible news agency," but that article was very powerful when it came out.
Quote from: Olde on Nov 25, 2017, 03:07:50 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 24, 2017, 11:27:22 AM
You guys have to remember that no creditable news agency ever runs a story accusing someone of a serious crime or ethical issue without first fact checking, seeking evidence, interviewing credible sources and then double checking the facts again. So when the shit hits the nightly news; it's usually fairly correct accusations. Now that stuff on twitter that's open to anyone... yea it's a lost cause. I don't consider it nor any social media in general credible.
This (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/business/media/rolling-stone-retracts-article-on-rape-at-university-of-virginia.html) immediately sprang to mind. Although I'm sure there are other instances, and sure, it may not qualify as your definition of "credible news agency," but that article was very powerful when it came out.
That's a much better example.
Yea but you guys are taking the few bad examples and towing out the baby with the bath water. Also the rolling stone and CNN are not true journalistic entities. One is more tabloid while the other is a news arrogate reporting on other's journalist news stories. CNN does do news to a point but they are also smitten by the entertainment bug. Still in most cases the facts are sorted out before hand.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Nov 26, 2017, 07:51:49 AM
Yea but you guys are taking the few bad examples and towing out the baby with the bath water. Also the rolling stone and CNN are not true journalistic entities. One is more tabloid while the other is a news arrogate reporting on other's journalist news stories. CNN does do news to a point but they are also smitten by the entertainment bug. Still in most cases the facts are sorted out before hand.
But are they, though? Can they really be 'bitten by the entertainment bug' and also adhere to the kinds of strict journalistic ethics that would be necessary to make a massive reporting entity like CNN not corrupt? We can piss and moan all day about what the definition of journalism is and what entity is and isn't a journalistic outlet, but I see no reason to try and quarantine these events as just a few bad apples. They could very well be indicative of a greater problem. That's something you have to investigate, not just dismissed.
Arguing CNN into a 'reporting aggregate', and so 'not really journalism', doesn't really address any concerns. I'm not even sure what exactly it's supposed to do, if not obfuscate the issue.
CNN reports the news from other sources. Such as the AP and Reuters and then they talk about it. For a long time. They don't do much of their own investigative reporting because it is a very expensive endeavor and 24 hours a day is a lot to fill.
All news can have a liberal, conservative or nihilist bias as a few examples. However those that distrust journalism more often then not have fallen victim to propaganda when arriving at a reason to believe or not to believe something. Also you have to separate what is journalism and opinionated news programming. The line's been blurred between what is news and entertainment. Most on air 24 hour tv news channels and radio are not journalism, they are opinion and entertainment. Many newspaper agencies are still manned by journalist's and adhere to strict ethical guidelines. If they didn't, they would be out of there. Too many interest in the world want people to believe that journalist are not to be trusted but they are doing the same job as they have done for well over a hundred years and that is to get the facts out there.
So when people site a loss of confidence is journalism that is troubling. However is it really what is happening or just confusion on what is and is not real journalism. I mean you think fake news was by accident?
QuoteSo when people site a loss of confidence is journalism that is troubling.
Speaking personally, my distrust comes from everything you said before this quoted text. Specifically, this.
QuoteAlso you have to separate what is journalism and opinionated news programming. The line's been blurred between what is news and entertainment. Most on air 24 hour tv news channels and radio are not journalism, they are opinion and entertainment. Many newspaper agencies are still manned by journalist's and adhere to strict ethical guidelines.
EVEN if I grant you that last part, and that's a big even, you're still describing exactly the kind of environment where shit like that Rolling Stones article and its effects can become more prevalent. It's a danger you have to consider. The 24 hour news cycle and the need for views is poison to integrity. Telling me there's 'pure sources' out there that the likes of CNN can draw from doesn't really reassure me, man, it just makes those sources seem powerless and likely to get a bit tainted themselves.
QuoteHowever is it really what is happening or just confusion on what is and is not real journalism. I mean you think fake news was by accident?
What, exactly, are you saying here? I don't want to misunderstand you, and I also don't want to be misunderstood as irrationally against 'da mainstream media what is evil and money'. I want to be able to trust news sources, really, but as you've said, the lines are blurred. I always feel like I'm walking a minefield whenever I need to find a source on anything to add to these discussions, just in case it's a shitty source that looks presentable and I end up looking bad and discrediting whatever point I'm trying to get across.
Honestly, such a scenario makes the minutia of journalism vs reporting seem kind of pointless. Does it matter where the information is coming from if the way I need to consume it is this f**ked? The potential presence of good corn in a shit tornado isn't very appealing.
Before you believe anything you read or see in the media, look at where their funding and advertising revenue is coming from. Most American media companies receive the bulk of their money from 1) defense contractors, 2) big pharma, 3) insurance companies, and 4) oligarchs/billionaires. For instance, the WaPo is currently a subsidiary of Amazon--which currently has a $600 million contract with the CIA. Is it any wonder why the WaPo is constantly shilling for more war and foreign intervention?
WaPo and CNN are hot garbage.
So how many individuals have you people sexualized today?
When I honk my horn at a woman walking along, any you ladies consider that sexual harassment?
Quote from: Sabby on Dec 01, 2017, 11:48:18 AM
So how many individuals have you people sexualized today?
Not enough.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Dec 01, 2017, 04:08:16 PM
When I honk my horn at a woman walking along, any you ladies consider that sexual harassment?
That's pretty much rape nowadays.
Quote from: Samhain13 on Dec 01, 2017, 04:52:38 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Dec 01, 2017, 11:48:18 AM
So how many individuals have you people sexualized today?
Not enough.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Dec 01, 2017, 04:08:16 PM
When I honk my horn at a woman walking along, any you ladies consider that sexual harassment?
That's pretty much rape nowadays.
;D
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Dec 01, 2017, 04:08:16 PM
When I honk my horn at a woman walking along, any you ladies consider that sexual harassment?
I'm not a lady, but that's pretty stupid and annoying, why would you do that?
Ladies? Here? With the kind of attitudes on display?
:laugh:
Quote from: Scorpio on Dec 01, 2017, 08:40:04 PM
I'm not a lady, but that's pretty stupid and annoying, why would you do that?
When I honk my horn at a man, any you gentlemen consider that sexual harassment?
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Dec 01, 2017, 10:41:20 PM
Quote from: Scorpio on Dec 01, 2017, 08:40:04 PM
I'm not a lady, but that's pretty stupid and annoying, why would you do that?
When I honk my horn at a man, any you gentlemen consider that sexual harassment?
Depends on how good you look.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Dec 01, 2017, 10:41:20 PM
Quote from: Scorpio on Dec 01, 2017, 08:40:04 PM
I'm not a lady, but that's pretty stupid and annoying, why would you do that?
When I honk my horn at a man, any you gentlemen consider that sexual harassment?
Depends on how insecure the guy is.
Maybe I should clarify. I wasn't driving. I wasn't even in my car. When I go out in public, I carry one of those small canister air horns in my pants pocket.
Glad to see so many understanding folk. ::)