Posts by krothville
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The humanity, in reply to tussock,
All our milk is "natural" in that it's turned into powder to be reformulated before being reconstituted as milk with various additives, that in itself is not cheap, but every step is another chance for profit.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but are you saying that the liquid milk in the supermarket chillers has actually been reconstituted from powdered milk?
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Jack Harrison,
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I meant, perhaps, as in perhaps that's relevant to her false equivalences, perhaps it's not. I know she's a right wing mouth piece and all.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Jack Harrison,
Perhaps. But I think that no one has picked up on what seems to me to be a very important distinction re: the information both parties (S&G v Key) released.
Which is actually a major problem I have with the media in this country. Not picking up on false equivalences, and subsequently falling for misdirection. Pisses me the fuck off every time.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Fran O'Sullivan,
Context - Hardly an attack on Snowden - just pointing out some hypocrisy.
"Bizarrely, it is somehow seen as perfectly all right for Dotcom and his associates to use stolen National Security Agency files to try to prove the Prime Minister a liar on how his Government has administered national security, but not for Key to declassify New Zealand's own files to prove he isn't a liar."
Snowden and Greenwald released *American* files. Key released *New Zealand* files. New Zealand has laws about what things can be classified and subsequently declassified and Key broke those laws in releasing the previously classified files. Context yes, but you're falsely making equivalent two different sets of information, one set leaked by a whistle-blower, the other declassified for no other reason than it was politically convenient to provide a "squirrel!" moment for the media.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to BenWilson,
Sure, I'm not doing anything more interesting right now anyway...
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to nzlemming,
After all, weeks – literally weeks – of Dirty Politics coverage didn’t move the polls at all.
Because "the media" (with damn few exceptions) didn't cover Dirty Politics as much as National's dismissal of Dirty Politics.
+1
Seriously. -
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Yeah, I got your meaning :)
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
"If compulsory voting is adopted, there surely should be a ‘no vote’ option also."
Yes ok. Spoil it if it works for you e.g Fuk John Key :)
Well, I think that if used properly, it would give a bit more information about people. I.e., if people tick no confidence, then that would seem to suggest that they have looked at the options, and have no confidence in any of them, whereas 'no vote' seems to suggest that they're really just not that fussed about the election.
-
Hard News: The humanity, in reply to Kumara Republic,
If you’re following the news then you never have to worry about being biased.
Except that thanks to Dirty politics, we've seen that that is not the case.
There's absolutely no such thing as unbiased reporting. Every journalist (or media boss, whatever) carries their own opinions and experiences around with them, and that informs everything they do, and every angle they frame the story with.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Katharine Moody,
There's a great organisation called RockEnrol lead by young voters who are recommending compulsory voting coupled with a 'no confidence' option.
If compulsory voting is adopted, there surely should be a 'no vote' option also.