CNN is wordy and seems to be an attempt to try and minimize the very real risks. Fox just states the facts without social class cues regarding the patient. It doesn't really matter whether the patient is a physician or a beggar - the disease doesn't care. Those who believe that there are the "right" people and everyone else *do* care.
Even with the proper equipment that is now finally starting to reach Africa, the death rates among health care workers are shocking. A suspected case is in a Kaiser hospital in the Sacramento area.
The headlines in online newspapers are pretty appalling nowadays too. You need shock value to get clicks. It's not a new phenomena though. I still remember the front page for one of our afternoon papers 15 years ago. It was folded on a table, and I could see the headline "VIRUS TAPPOI PRESIDENTIN" (A virus killed the president). When I grabbed the paper, I saw the next line, which was below the fold; "YSTÄVÄN", which changes the whole sentence to "A virus killed the president's friend". I bet a lot of others fell for that too.
Quote: Sure, there are risks, and I would not have transported the victims out of the area. But the first impression I get from the Fox headline, is that patient zero has been found in the States, and that pandemic will ensue, not that the contained transport has arrived to the country.
I think I will just stop watching, reading, or listening to news, all together. Y'all let me know if there is something I need to be aware of..............
I agree that Rachel Maddow is better than most of the "hucksters" on the "news". I can't watch FOX because even though I like to laugh, I don't find them funny. I think the "reporters" on that show getting misty eyed over how good a false report would be IF IT WERE ONLY TRUE.
I have seen the rabid reports from the other side as well. They (just about every "news" channel out there whether they lean left or right) likes to sit pompously in their chairs (stools, couches whatever) and point to the other channels and say what a horrible job the other channels are doing reporting the news. They all say that the other channels are highly biased and wrong. Well, I have yet to see a channel (I haven't seen Al Jazeera America yet) that isn't highly biased/opnionated/wrong for the sake of ratings. It is all because "we" (the viewing public) apparently want our news this way. I think it is more the case of the squeaky wheel and sane people just not listening to any of the "news" channels. This puts us all in a predicament though because now where do you go to get fact checked fairly unbiased news? Maybe Al Jazeera may be the answer, IDK.
BTW, I saw on FB the other day a "poster" comparing Hillary to Hitler. Geez, next election cycle is going to hugely suck....
I love watching MSNBC finding "crises" that we all need to panic about and somehow all of these crises involve a dramatic need for us to either open our wallets or cede our rights in the interests of the children, etc.
The most interesting show regarding the news was one I saw several years ago involving management and programming development staff from several news networks (not including Fox.) The audience was allowed to ask them questions and give them feedback. Over and over members of the audience told them they wanted real news, with information ,and they didn't like the efforts to bias the public with selective and highly adjectival reporting. They made it clear they felt that news broadcasting was heavily biased.
Do you know what the managers on that show told the audience? They told them that they didn't really want objective news, that what they wanted was entertainment and reinforcement of their own beliefs, and that part of the duty of the media was to encourage more "progressive" and "enlightened" attitudes. Most of the audience appeared to be in shock.
I had long been of the opinion that the purpose of news was no longer to report, but to attempt to mold public opinion.
OK, so, I tried to upload a peaceful, calming pic from my computer to insert a more calming, zen atmosphere into the thread but, it wouldn't let me do it!!!!
Why wouldn't they be on the internet? For some reason, merchants used to think that displaying the price lessens interest in it. I have found the opposite to be true. If one store shows the price for something, and the other doesn't, I'll go ti the store that does if I think the price is right. Hiding the price just means people won't even bother finding out what it costs.
I always, ALWAYS assume that if someone doesn't show the price for something, it is more expensive than I want to pay for it. For instance: A house for sale, why not put the price on the sign in the yard so when you drive by and see it, you can tell if you want to stop and look or not? It's so the agent or homeowner can try to talk you into buying it whether or not it is more than you can afford or want to pay for it. Same with anything else in my book.
If the price is on the sign in the yard, I can save both myself and the agent/owner time. I know I can or can not afford it and I don't want to put up with a slick talker trying to get me to pay more for something than I can afford.
When I have to call and ask a price for something, I always get someone trying to push a sale on me. I have my items or points I want to know about, I don't need to know anything about all the other stuff until I find out if I can afford it first and foremost. Then I have a list that I go down, using buying a house for example again: next to price, how many bedrooms? how many bathrooms? how much land? how many outbuildings?
Same thing with anything I want to buy. I have a very good idea of what I am looking for in whatever I want, why do people have to push? I am a very polite person and don't usually interrupt someone doing their spiel but when they start that stuff, all I want is to get away.
Quote: The only time I can understand not posting prices, is when you're selling custom made or highly specific industrial products, where there aren't many players selling the products.
