On Nov 9, 2009, at 8:17 PM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote:
> Yeah, part of my point. Little content other than a push toward > favored > solution sellers. I did mention my media studies, right? Had the > article > been thick with logic and reasoning I would have thought the intent > really > was to give users a heads up for recovery archiving. I do not blame > you. > This is what passes on the net for serious journalism these days. > Thinly > veiled sales pitches. Only one step up from " hey , Senor, you want > to see > pictures of my seester?" For someone so steeped in media studies you seem rather monumentally unaware of who is paying the bills. You didn't pay to read that article, did you? And secondly, no this article is not what passes for serious journalism these days. Stuff like this is what passes for serious journalism these days: <http://www.propublica.org/> <http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/> (who were the folks who helped break the US Attorney firings scandal by taking the massive 'Friday Afternoon Taking out the Trash' document dumps from the Justice Department and the White House, and utilizing the power of the internet, had all their readers grab a page or two and go through it. Within 48 hours after the DOJ dumped several thousand documents in a Friday afternoon...which mainstream media would never have been able to even scratch, they'd identified the 'smoking gun' documents and had outlined the scandal: that US Attorneys, who are statutorily removed from political considerations, were under heavy pressure from the political side of the White House to pursue politically-linked prosecutions aimed at the upcoming 2006 elections. Those that resisted, like David Iglesisas, were fired. Distributed cooperative muckraking....Upton Sinclair would have been proud, in many ways.) McClatchy's series on the Goldman-Sachs and the Wall Street Scandal <http://www.mcclatchydc.com/goldman/> And their scathing investigation of the credit ratings agency Moody's <http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/77244.html> MacWorld, hell this is all that Macworld EVER HAS BEEN, a conduit for advertising. Back in the day they had decent articles, but they've gotten thinner and thinner, like all magazines thee days; who can compete with free content online? You want less advertising, and better journalism? Start paying for the content. You can't have it both ways. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
