Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
14 Pages«<678910>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Nonstopdrivel  
#106 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 6:32:12 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Germany

Applause Given: 364
Applause Received: 263

Because journalism as we traditionalists think of it is essentially dead. What now passes for news is now little more than rumormongering , because it's cheap (all you need to do is cruise the Twitter feeds), and there's nothing to be held accountable for, since you're dealing only in possibilities. Almost no one spends money on investigative journalism anymore. Why should they? They can amass their ratings at almost zero cost nowadays.
UserPostedImage
Offline bozz_2006  
#107 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 6:38:29 PM(UTC)
bozz_2006

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 7/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 20
Applause Received: 14

Brett, I can't quit you!
UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#108 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 6:40:27 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,077

Beyond Peter King, there is literally no national beat writers I faithfully read.. he seems more content to post full out complete thoughts or opinions than being first to the press.. and even he, by his contact to Brett got caught up in this, the true, never ending story.

The Brett ever shifting quagmire of a story is compounded by Brett's indecisive nature make it a free for all.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Nonstopdrivel  
#109 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 6:56:03 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Germany

Applause Given: 364
Applause Received: 263

A carefully crafted mythos has long surrounded the news. It was always first and foremost about entertainment, of course, but we we told ourselves that we watched and read the news to be informed, and the news providers assured us that was what they were doing. We told ourselves that journalists were fair, objective, and balanced, and they assured us they were.

Of course, all of this was a collective fantasy, as even some of the old-timers themselves have admitted in recent years. Journalists were always obsessed with getting "the scoop," but information moved slower then, so they had the luxury of taking time to check up on their hot tip before someone else scooped them. Nowadays, with our mind-boggling array of information portals, information can be disseminated so rapidly and so abundantly that we seem to place less value in information. Therefore, if it turns out that a juicy tidbit is false, it's so easy and quick to distribute the correction widely that we don't seem to care nearly as much when journalists are wrong these days. Because the ramifications for screwing up are so much less severe than they used to be, news rooms put much less effort into fact-checking and corroborating sources; indeed, even the largest networks have drastically reduced the staffing in their newsrooms over the past decade.

The end result is that the reporter is a dying breed. There's no such thing as a factual, informative article anymore. Everyone is an "analyst" these days, which is a polite industry term for "essayist." It's a rare article indeed in which the author doesn't insert some obviously slanted commentary. What's most amazing to me is that personal opinions are rife even in articles without by-lines! What's the point of interjecting one's own ideas in an anonymous article? But it happens constantly.
UserPostedImage
Offline porky88  
#110 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 8:07:59 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 193
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Great, this means we'll have a 2nd teary eyed retirement speech.


Nope. He'll sit out the first four weeks and then come in. I'm calling it now, which means he'll probably retire because Favre is the most unpredictable athlete of all time.

Seriously, I think that's the best thing for everyone involved. Sit him and let him heal. Why would you want Favre to go up against a dirty team like New Orleans? Yes, I said dirty. Who cares if you lose a road game against the defending champs. You get Favre back after a 1-2 start and there is no reason why you can't go 10-3 the rest of the way. That gets you in the playoffs for a run.

The biggest thing here is whether or not Favre's ankle responds even in that time span and whether or not his ego will let him miss a couple of games.


Calling the Saints a dirty team is like calling that man in your signature a bigot. It may be technically true because you can point to a few instances, but they're/he's good enough that it doesn't matter.


See dirty has become a bad word in football terms. I don't think it's a bad thing all the time. I think when you're that close, you do whatever it takes. I actually respect that. But they took cheap shots. No other way around that and I think they'll take em again in the opener.
Offline porky88  
#111 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 8:11:56 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 193
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
After all the evidence of the past couple years.. especially in regards to Favre.. the media types report first on the hints of a possible event and then after they claim they were first.. start to validate that there is any truth to their spun version of the story.

And the funny part is we or most fall for it hook, line and sinker time after time. It isn't just ESPN.. it is all these damn journalists that seem centered on being first more than being right.


I don't agree with this when it comes to Favre. The info gets out there IMO because it's true. And Jay Glazer is a well respected reporter. He's right more often than not. He broke the texting story and I'm guessing his first source was Jared Allen, who is a good buddy of his. Then he contacted other players to verify, which is the proper thing to do. There are also eyewitness accounts of an intense meeting on the sideline. There is too much there and you can kind of see the domino effect.
Offline Wade  
#112 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 10:49:45 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 678
Applause Received: 698

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Because journalism as we traditionalists think of it is essentially dead. What now passes for news is now little more than rumormongering , because it's cheap (all you need to do is cruise the Twitter feeds), and there's nothing to be held accountable for, since you're dealing only in possibilities. Almost no one spends money on investigative journalism anymore. Why should they? They can amass their ratings at almost zero cost nowadays.[/quote]

Only because "we, the people" let them. If the average American didn't have the attention span of a gnat, they wouldn't be able to get away with it.

It's not particularly hard to ignore the drivel that passes for reporting these days. In fact, it's getting easier all the time.

It's just that too many people don't want to.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline longtimefan  
#113 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 10:54:12 PM(UTC)
longtimefan

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 11/30/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 21

A certain pilot for a certain q/.b that owns a certain "official" web site had this to say when talking about odds this q/b returns

Quote:
I say 100 percent. Don't ever piss Brett off. He will take the fight.
Offline Wade  
#114 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:12:50 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 678
Applause Received: 698

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
A carefully crafted mythos has long surrounded the news. It was always first and foremost about entertainment, of course, but we we told ourselves that we watched and read the news to be informed, and the news providers assured us that was what they were doing. We told ourselves that journalists were fair, objective, and balanced, and they assured us they were.

Of course, all of this was a collective fantasy, as even some of the old-timers themselves have admitted in recent years. Journalists were always obsessed with getting "the scoop," but information moved slower then, so they had the luxury of taking time to check up on their hot tip before someone else scooped them. Nowadays, with our mind-boggling array of information portals, information can be disseminated so rapidly and so abundantly that we seem to place less value in information. Therefore, if it turns out that a juicy tidbit is false, it's so easy and quick to distribute the correction widely that we don't seem to care nearly as much when journalists are wrong these days. Because the ramifications for screwing up are so much less severe than they used to be, news rooms put much less effort into fact-checking and corroborating sources; indeed, even the largest networks have drastically reduced the staffing in their newsrooms over the past decade.

The end result is that the reporter is a dying breed. There's no such thing as a factual, informative article anymore. Everyone is an "analyst" these days, which is a polite industry term for "essayist." It's a rare article indeed in which the author doesn't insert some obviously slanted commentary. What's most amazing to me is that personal opinions are rife even in articles without by-lines! What's the point of interjecting one's own ideas in an anonymous article? But it happens constantly.


I agree, mostly.

You are correct that it has always been about in large part, in primary part, entertainment. So was Shakespeare, for that matter.

However, the quality of the entertainment has declined dramatically. (And done so, in my opinion, because the standards of those who would be entertained has dramatically declined.)

One benefit of having done a PhD in history is that I spent a lot of time reading old newspapers, pamphlets, and other pieces of the "popular" press from both sides of the Atlantic.

Technological limitations being what they were in the late 18th and 19th centuries, there was much less "visual" press, but there was no shortage of tabloid and hack journalism/unresearched opining back then. (And, though I haven't done specific research in other places or periods, I expect it has always been the case). The lack of "instant information" may have allowed more deliberation than now, but the lack of "speedy transportation" also made the collection of information much more problematic.

But in general, both "essayists" and "reporters" did a better job. The difference between a Montaigne or a Johnson or a Woolf and even those who are thought to be "best" among today's essayists/commentators is night and day.

And so was the quality of writing for the "masses".

It wasn't just the elites who got the better writing. It was everyone.

Take a look at Thomas Paine's Common Sense or Rights of Man sometime. Paine scared the crap out of a lot of people on both sides of the ocean. Why? Because everyday people were interested in reading and thinking about and might act upon what Paine wrote.

I once taught a course where students were assigned big chunks of both Edmund Burke and Paine. I expected to have trouble getting them to read Burke because he wrote like a British MP of the time wrote, and late 18th century muckety-muck speech is an acquired taste. But forget Burke; I couldn't even get them interested in spending enough time to get into Paine.

I love to bash the media. Especially twits like ESPN and CNN. But if I'm being honest, the reason they keep doing what they are doing is because that's what most people want them to do.

We say we want better. But we reveal our true preferences not by our words, but by our actions. And we keep watching the bastards.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline longtimefan  
#115 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:27:15 PM(UTC)
longtimefan

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 11/30/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 21

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
the guy wondering why it matters has the most post on the subject lol


I am a self described Favre Lover. So obviously I am going to follow his moves in the off season and defend him when people are calling him a liar, etc. But for Packers fans that are apprently "so over Favre", the obsession level with him is unbelievable. There are probably more posts about Text-Gate (texts that may or may not have happened) than there has been on the Packers periods all off season.

Why this big need to discredit him or whatever, Packers have a great QB in Aaron Rodgers, move on if you don't like Favre. But as long as people are going to bring him up and talk about him, I am going to discuss but at the same time I am not going to pretend that I am "so over Favre".

"Oh man I'm so glad that I'm not a Vikings fan and we don't have to deal with this Favre stuff anymore". What? We are all obsessed with his every move on this board. I would guess that Packers fans care more about Favre's every move than Vikings fans do, they seem to have the logical strategy of "waiting and seeing" until they hear from Favre or the Vikings about him retiring.


I dont recall seeing a person say he is over Brett but then is always talking about him..

Even so what does "over him" mean? Finally over the fact he wont pull his retire/non retirement talk for the Packers?

Finally over the fact he now is not a Favre lover but can see the way Brett acts?

Some people want to see Brett fail and fall on his ass, some want him to sit next to GOD..

but it is fun to see the double standards that the Brett worshipers have and I LOVE to prove them wrong
Offline Formo  
#116 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:38:44 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Great, this means we'll have a 2nd teary eyed retirement speech.


Nope. He'll sit out the first four weeks and then come in. I'm calling it now, which means he'll probably retire because Favre is the most unpredictable athlete of all time.

Seriously, I think that's the best thing for everyone involved. Sit him and let him heal. Why would you want Favre to go up against a dirty team like New Orleans? Yes, I said dirty. Who cares if you lose a road game against the defending champs. You get Favre back after a 1-2 start and there is no reason why you can't go 10-3 the rest of the way. That gets you in the playoffs for a run.

The biggest thing here is whether or not Favre's ankle responds even in that time span and whether or not his ego will let him miss a couple of games.


Calling the Saints a dirty team is like calling that man in your signature a bigot. It may be technically true because you can point to a few instances, but they're/he's good enough that it doesn't matter.


You are more of a bigot than any bible thumping Christian I have met. And I have met quite a few bible thumpers in my life.


I meant to put a =) in this post. I dunno how I forgot. I just hate the over use of the word bigot (mostly used to describe a Christian or racist in my experiences).
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline Formo  
#117 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:46:10 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
A carefully crafted mythos has long surrounded the news. It was always first and foremost about entertainment, of course, but we we told ourselves that we watched and read the news to be informed, and the news providers assured us that was what they were doing. We told ourselves that journalists were fair, objective, and balanced, and they assured us they were.

Of course, all of this was a collective fantasy, as even some of the old-timers themselves have admitted in recent years. Journalists were always obsessed with getting "the scoop," but information moved slower then, so they had the luxury of taking time to check up on their hot tip before someone else scooped them. Nowadays, with our mind-boggling array of information portals, information can be disseminated so rapidly and so abundantly that we seem to place less value in information. Therefore, if it turns out that a juicy tidbit is false, it's so easy and quick to distribute the correction widely that we don't seem to care nearly as much when journalists are wrong these days. Because the ramifications for screwing up are so much less severe than they used to be, news rooms put much less effort into fact-checking and corroborating sources; indeed, even the largest networks have drastically reduced the staffing in their newsrooms over the past decade.

The end result is that the reporter is a dying breed. There's no such thing as a factual, informative article anymore. Everyone is an "analyst" these days, which is a polite industry term for "essayist." It's a rare article indeed in which the author doesn't insert some obviously slanted commentary. What's most amazing to me is that personal opinions are rife even in articles without by-lines! What's the point of interjecting one's own ideas in an anonymous article? But it happens constantly.


+1

Great post, and why I don't follow 'news' other than sports.. and I'm even getting sick of doing that.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline Gravedigga  
#118 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:00:15 AM(UTC)
Gravedigga

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/16/2008(UTC)


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
the guy wondering why it matters has the most post on the subject lol


I am a self described Favre Lover. So obviously I am going to follow his moves in the off season and defend him when people are calling him a liar, etc. But for Packers fans that are apprently "so over Favre", the obsession level with him is unbelievable. There are probably more posts about Text-Gate (texts that may or may not have happened) than there has been on the Packers periods all off season.

Why this big need to discredit him or whatever, Packers have a great QB in Aaron Rodgers, move on if you don't like Favre. But as long as people are going to bring him up and talk about him, I am going to discuss but at the same time I am not going to pretend that I am "so over Favre".

"Oh man I'm so glad that I'm not a Vikings fan and we don't have to deal with this Favre stuff anymore". What? We are all obsessed with his every move on this board. I would guess that Packers fans care more about Favre's every move than Vikings fans do, they seem to have the logical strategy of "waiting and seeing" until they hear from Favre or the Vikings about him retiring.


My thoughts exactly
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Offline longtimefan  
#119 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:04:56 AM(UTC)
longtimefan

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 11/30/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 21

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
the guy wondering why it matters has the most post on the subject lol


I am a self described Favre Lover. So obviously I am going to follow his moves in the off season and defend him when people are calling him a liar, etc. But for Packers fans that are apprently "so over Favre", the obsession level with him is unbelievable. There are probably more posts about Text-Gate (texts that may or may not have happened) than there has been on the Packers periods all off season.

Why this big need to discredit him or whatever, Packers have a great QB in Aaron Rodgers, move on if you don't like Favre. But as long as people are going to bring him up and talk about him, I am going to discuss but at the same time I am not going to pretend that I am "so over Favre".

"Oh man I'm so glad that I'm not a Vikings fan and we don't have to deal with this Favre stuff anymore". What? We are all obsessed with his every move on this board. I would guess that Packers fans care more about Favre's every move than Vikings fans do, they seem to have the logical strategy of "waiting and seeing" until they hear from Favre or the Vikings about him retiring.


My thoughts exactly




Well you know what they say dont read it if you dont want to hear about it
Offline Gravedigga  
#120 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:09:29 AM(UTC)
Gravedigga

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/16/2008(UTC)


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Because journalism as we traditionalists think of it is essentially dead. What now passes for news is now little more than rumormongering , .


No kidding. I didn't believe it from the start because I woke up that day and I heard "anonymous source, favre texts he's done". It seemed like within 10 minutes, every network had this as the #1 story all day long. They interviewed it seems like 50 different atheletes, coaches and former teammates on the subject asking for their reaction and "can they believe it" all the while their source was an unnamed source.

ESPN wanted this to grow so it grew. Maybe they pay Favre a million dollars for fake retirements so they can run with it and jack up their ratings for a few days. That kind of news and ratings is worth so much money in ratings I wouldnt doubt it or that they at least have a policy to report misinformation for the sake of ratings. It was ESPN's only story all day long the first day and even after the story was refuted, it was still a story. On the bottom line, it showed the story was not accurate while the show was saying he's retiring. Just a big fucking media joke of misreporting and conflicting information. The story was obviously not accurate but they just go ahead with it anyway.
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
14 Pages«<678910>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
39m / Announcements / Zero2Cool

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / coltonja

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

21h / Announcements / Zero2Cool

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann