Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
What did you learn today?
- Thread starter PWRL
- Start date
"Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news—things which on their own merits would get the big headlines—being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralised, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.
The Freedom of the Press
Most wildfire coverage on American TV news fails to mention link to climate crisis
You won't find it mentioned much anywhere...
The Freedom of the Press
Most wildfire coverage on American TV news fails to mention link to climate crisis
You won't find it mentioned much anywhere...
I just learned that my mother shares her birthdate with Rocky Lane, the cowboy actor
who did the voice of Mr. Ed!
Earthshaking, I know.
who did the voice of Mr. Ed!
Earthshaking, I know.
Of course you understand that the linked article is as carefully crafted as the practice that it criticizes.
No, but I will ask you some questions that will lead you to make your own discoveries.
Why did the study cited use 1972 as a start date?
Why did the article quote only one authority figure?
Does the quoted figure/org have any stature?
Should any reference have been made to fires caused by human actions?
We'll start with this one, trends are usually measured over 30 years, not the day before yesterday.
Of course climate change is real. It has been changing for 6 billion or more years. Can’t imagine it would stop for any reason.
Learned way back:
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
Jonathan Swift.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
Jonathan Swift.
California's heat wave and lightning storms rooted in same weather pattern
I'll ask once more, do you accept the reality of AGW? Or do you know more than the world's climate scientists?
I don’t understand why you are going down this road. My intent was to illustrate that some things are extremely complicated and that narratives often employ the tactic of omitting inconvenient data. I don’t recall making a statement in support of or against anything. I believe I have made my point. Good day, sir.
Then what is the problem with answering it? Yes or no, that's all. You are certainly doing your best to evade it. What's the matter?
