<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 7 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>When you say "either" you are referring to ParcFerme.
So I didn't find the word in either post? Um, what will your retraction sound like?I realize you have trouble reading, but are you blind to?
Obviously you and Parc missed the point. Parc, I got you are saying that it should not be called an article. However, both of you come out and say this article (or call it whatever you want) was .... (or as you say Parc, not "journalism"). The thing is it has facts and opinion like many articles; and as many do, they have a bias. When you read an "article" and the "journalist" quotes a rider then says for example this riders quotes "flames" or is "outraged" or "downplayed" such and such, guess what, this is the writer's OPINION. We see that commonly on Crash.net and other news media. The rider they are quoting may disagree with that characterization of his quote, yet we don't go around saying the article is .... or dismiss it. But you two jumped all over this one because it cast a favorable light on somebody you clearly may not like. You two come down on it because Adams makes an opinion (which he usually does) and say this isn't journalism. Hello, there are many forms of journalism. There is that basic news report, then we have columns & editorials, opinion pieces, historical archives, etc. the word article does NOT have some magical designation making it true. Its simply a written piece, its simply a non fiction piece. Now you can say maybe Adams is lying. But it doesn't automatically call for you to say its not an article.
I think you missed our point. Adams has never come up with a single favorable word regarding anythin european or generally anything comming from outside USA. Thats not the kind of bias you expect from a jounalist. On a blog yes but not in an "article" or "column" by an acociated writer. His .... never carry any balance. So, it's not this "article" that is ...., it's most of what he writes that involves international racing. It's fine with editorials and opinions but it should be funded better with better arguments. That make his scramblings not even worth the bandwidth it consumes.
I clearly see how you root for the guy as you both carry the same blindness from time time to time. But from a journalist even you should expect some kind of balance.
So I didn't find the word in either post? Um, what will your retraction sound like?I realize you have trouble reading, but are you blind to?
Obviously you and Parc missed the point. Parc, I got you are saying that it should not be called an article. However, both of you come out and say this article (or call it whatever you want) was .... (or as you say Parc, not "journalism"). The thing is it has facts and opinion like many articles; and as many do, they have a bias. When you read an "article" and the "journalist" quotes a rider then says for example this riders quotes "flames" or is "outraged" or "downplayed" such and such, guess what, this is the writer's OPINION. We see that commonly on Crash.net and other news media. The rider they are quoting may disagree with that characterization of his quote, yet we don't go around saying the article is .... or dismiss it. But you two jumped all over this one because it cast a favorable light on somebody you clearly may not like. You two come down on it because Adams makes an opinion (which he usually does) and say this isn't journalism. Hello, there are many forms of journalism. There is that basic news report, then we have columns & editorials, opinion pieces, historical archives, etc. the word article does NOT have some magical designation making it true. Its simply a written piece, its simply a non fiction piece. Now you can say maybe Adams is lying. But it doesn't automatically call for you to say its not an article.
I think you missed our point. Adams has never come up with a single favorable word regarding anythin european or generally anything comming from outside USA. Thats not the kind of bias you expect from a jounalist. On a blog yes but not in an "article" or "column" by an acociated writer. His .... never carry any balance. So, it's not this "article" that is ...., it's most of what he writes that involves international racing. It's fine with editorials and opinions but it should be funded better with better arguments. That make his scramblings not even worth the bandwidth it consumes.
I clearly see how you root for the guy as you both carry the same blindness from time time to time. But from a journalist even you should expect some kind of balance.
