(no subject)
Sep. 20th, 2004 05:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theweaselkingGotta love Pravda.
Three articles: A new kind of vibrator for lazy people
With this headline, how can you go wrong? "Lesbian waffles available in Russia "
and here's a demonstration of the graphic differences between journalistic practices overseas and back here: A subheadline of "This election is rigged and Bush will win no matter what."
The article, of course, is discussing the elctronic voting machines, how they are insecure, trivially easy to edit votes on, have no paper trail, and are made by companies with strong ties to the Bush administration - and how, in one test on Diebold voting machines, the machine reported "Bush" winning in a close race despite "Kerry" getting 100% of the votes in the test.
And then there's those things Diebold's CEO has done, like his interoffice memos promising that if his machines are used, Bush will win in Ohio in 2004, and his statement that any action is justified if it means Bush is re-elected.
But, hey, it didn't come from Fox News, so it couldn't possible be fair and balanced and thus true, right?
Three articles: A new kind of vibrator for lazy people
With this headline, how can you go wrong? "Lesbian waffles available in Russia "
and here's a demonstration of the graphic differences between journalistic practices overseas and back here: A subheadline of "This election is rigged and Bush will win no matter what."
The article, of course, is discussing the elctronic voting machines, how they are insecure, trivially easy to edit votes on, have no paper trail, and are made by companies with strong ties to the Bush administration - and how, in one test on Diebold voting machines, the machine reported "Bush" winning in a close race despite "Kerry" getting 100% of the votes in the test.
And then there's those things Diebold's CEO has done, like his interoffice memos promising that if his machines are used, Bush will win in Ohio in 2004, and his statement that any action is justified if it means Bush is re-elected.
But, hey, it didn't come from Fox News, so it couldn't possible be fair and balanced and thus true, right?