(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?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-20 03:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-20 08:33 pm (UTC)And I agree - the sad thing is how much of the information, despite the WWN delivery, actually checks out factually.
For what it's worth, that last article is just a reprinting of things that everyone *should* have seen elsewhere by now - what really made me want to link to it was the blunt byline, which was something I'd never expect to see from a western paper.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-21 10:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-21 05:04 pm (UTC)I think I'm missing something, here. Link?
(I've discovered a REAL fondness for Pravda's editorials (http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/368/14278_Kerry.html), though.
"House Speaker Dennis Hastert, apparently speaking on behalf of al Qaeda, informed the American public that al Qaeda wants Kerry to win the US elections. In a CNN special report, Hastert"s claims are clearly stated.
Readers will remember Bush and Cheney have both said that if Kerry is elected, Osama Bin Laden will attack the US. Apparently they too are speaking on behalf of Bin Laden and al Qaeda.
For the Russian reader, one must understand the continuance of power in the US. If the president is incapacitated, the power moves to the vice president. If the vice president becomes incapacitated, the power then goes to the speaker of the house, which is Dennis Hastert.
The question now becomes why are all three in the power structure saying the same thing? What do they know that the world public is not, and has not, been told?
Is there a more than a friendly working relationship between the power structure of the US, Bin Laden, the al Qaeda, and Iraq?
We cannot dismiss this as part of the election campaign hype - it would be foolish to believe Bush, Cheney, and Hastert would all make the same claim without something behind it."
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-21 05:14 pm (UTC)The fact that Sex makes you smarter, I'm willing to take on faith.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-21 05:55 pm (UTC)If you actually read the articles, it shows that the headlines are really not supported much at all - and when the article claims what the headline does, it's written from a participant's perspective or as hearsay.
Which is not the sign of a good news source, I admit.
(And I'll believe *anything* they find in the North Sea, these days. Quick, Soviet joke: How can you tell a sailor is from the North Fleet?)