American Media

[kkddbb]

Fox uses Al Jazeera footage in their broadcasts. Open your mind.

using footage is just a bit different dont ya think. saying the network is fair and informative and using footage ie a bomb attach are completely different things. perhaps its not my mind thats closed.

 

[LuciferSam]

using footage is just a bit different dont ya think. saying the network is fair and informative and using footage ie a bomb attach are completely different things. perhaps its not my mind thats closed.

OK, Al Jazeera is fair and informative, but only when screened by Fox news. Nobody else, no individuals on the Left or the Right are capable of doing that for themselves.:roll:

 

[Lake View Too]

I trust Too Far Tampa's assessment that the covers were in 2006. Kurt, did you purposely mislead us just to bring the shout-downers out of the woodwork?

 

[Bob]

the 06 dynamic is even more relevant today

 

[TooFarTampa]

It's all about market share, ratings etc. We get the one sided American view because we mostly just tune in to these cable pundit programs and the networks that are increasingly cutting their budgets. We get mostly domestic news, because in part our media will not spend the money to send reporters around the world like we used to. Next time you watch a nightly news program see how much time is spent on international news including our wars.

For a more balanced view of what is going on in this world check out the BBC, Euronews, Al-Jezeera and others. The difference is striking and thought provoking.

All I know is when I was in Mexico during the early days of the swine flu outbreak and had access to Fox, CNN, and two BBC news channels, the BBC was by far the most informative of the bunch. It was not even close.

 

[Beach Runner]

Newsweek has turned into a rag ever since they changed the format this spring. The layout is horrible (according to my graphic designer/artist daughter), and the font is horrible (too difficult to read). It no longer "covers" the news.

I'm afraid that both printed magazines and newspapers will soon be a thing of the past. Actually the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has stopped delivering here. Our only option is online -- $15 for three months versus $65.24. Also that's a good thing in terms of being green, but I can take a magazine to the beach -- won't do that with my laptop. I guess anything you can see in a magazine/newspaper/book, you can see online. Even magazines like Southern Living are printing links to their websites in the magazine itself. Are they trying to put themselves out of business?

I guess I'm old school, but I'd much rather flip through a book or magazine, underline it, dog-ear the pages, etc., than read the same thing online. But that will soon be .

BTW re Kurt's post, magazines have always had different issues for different locations. Southern Living has special ads and sections directed at different states. Newsweek has always had ads geared towards different locations. Of course, U.S. and international news ... shouldn't that be pretty immutable?

 

[TooFarTampa]

Newsweek has turned into a rag ever since they changed the format this spring. The layout is horrible (according to my graphic designer/artist daughter), and the font is horrible (too difficult to read). It no longer "covers" the news.

I'm afraid that both printed magazines and newspapers will soon be a thing of the past. Actually the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has stopped delivering here. Our only option is online -- $15 for three months versus $65.24. Also that's a good thing in terms of being green, but I can take a magazine to the beach -- won't do that with my laptop. I guess anything you can see in a magazine/newspaper/book, you can see online. Even magazines like Southern Living are printing links to their websites in the magazine itself. Are they trying to put themselves out of business?

I guess I'm old school, but I'd much rather flip through a book or magazine, underline it, dog-ear the pages, etc., than read the same thing online. But that will soon be .

BTW re Kurt's post, magazines have always had different issues for different locations. Southern Living has special ads and sections directed at different states. Newsweek has always had ads geared towards different locations. Of course, U.S. and international news ... shouldn't that be pretty immutable?

I agree ... I really dislike the redesign and am glad to hear someone with a design background agrees. Also, editor Jon Meacham uses the mag to "generate conversation" in an attempt to set the agenda and I would just rather they do more hard-hitting analysis and stay out of the way. I prefer Time these days, by far. If Fareed jumps, I'm out.

 

[Kurt]

I trust Too Far Tampa's assessment that the covers were in 2006. Kurt, did you purposely mislead us just to bring the shout-downers out of the woodwork?

It was just posted on Digg. I 'm not that smart or that angry to care when the magazine publish date was.

The stereotype is that Americans are self centered and self serving, and that our media reflects that. The covers seem to illustrate the stereotype no matter the year.

 

[Lake View Too]

Oh, I get it now. There were a bunch of us that had the feeling we were headed into a new era of international and domestic honesty, and your post may have jolted me back into keeping an eye on everything. Um...are we still losing in Afganistan? Or does it matter?

 

[30ashopper]

you missed the point righthanders. newsweek needs to sell magazines. afghanistan/iraq/bush won't make anyone reach for the rack to purchase a copy. want to clear a room at a party? start talking about afghanistan or any other legacies of texas toast-head.

:roll:

reread your own posts. you are not making sense, but you are angry. you're town hall angry. if newsweek had put the same cover for the u.s., you would knee jerk complain that they are anti-war. newsweek is trying to sell to their market. americans are sick of war....aren't you?

pot -> kettle :roll::roll: