How the media manipulates us.

[Muddy]

http://i.imgur.com/abMQe.jpg

[Strong]

Your heard the phrase don't believe everything you read in reference to newspapers, right? Well it is no secret that you need to be as careful about what you see in the media.

Everybody spins to their own ends. He who pays the piper picks the tune. That is why monopolies in the media are a bad thing and why getting news only from one source gives you a skewed perspective on what is actually happening.

[Muddy]

Very true.

[Atom]

Muddy, what was the image width that you figured out was perfect for the forum? I can't remember, I believe it was seven hundred and something, I want to know because I want to see if that dimension allows for the extra width added when an image is quoted. I'm thinking that for this forum it needs to be slightly less than 800px to avoid breaching the margin after quoting or when replying. I can do several tests myself to find the answer I'm looking for but remembered that you had already figured it out.

[Muddy]

I'll check real quick...

Is that pic above too wide for your screen? Sorry if so.

[Muddy]

640 x 480

[Atom]

I'll check real quick...

Is that pic above too wide for your screen? Sorry if so.It's causing an over-width reply page only. My suspicion is that if it's quoted then it will throw this page as well, but maybe not, just have to try it I guess. I see that there's a comment in the properties that says it's been scaled, which I think is not working the way it should for some reason, in which case I think the best method might be resizing in PS or w/e. The scaling is probably automatic when an over-size pic is submitted but like I say it doesn't seem to perform adequately, I have always found a re-size in PS best prior to uploading.

[Atom]

640 x 480Ok, thanks. I thought it was in the upper 700's, I'll have to do some screwing around to find the perfect size without having to change any forum code or setting, I'm sure it's significantly more than 640, it's somewhere just under 800px.

[vectro]

Your heard the phrase don't believe everything you read in reference to newspapers, right? Well it is no secret that you need to be as careful about what you see in the media.

Here in the U.S. we have 3 major cable news stations that run in a 24-hour cycle. CNN, Fox and MSNBC. There are other 'minor' ones that are attached those those, but they are basically it. I make it a point to watch all 3 regularly just to compare the biases and B.S. between them. Fox will spin things in a COMPLETELY different way than MSNBC and sometimes the two report opposing facts about the same topic.

[Strong]

For a different perspective on the news, at least when it comes to international news, I would suggest the World Service radio broadcasts from the BBC. It don't get better than that.

[Brian]

Yeah, American news channels are all about large, flashy graphics that take up half of your screen. They hire "entertainers" who'll cry on screen rather than newscasters who'll report. People turn on the news here and get such biased opinion presented to them as fact and nothing ever gets fact checked. There are ZERO good news stations in the US.

[Brian]

Case in point,

Maybe the poll question should have been, "Do news stations alter poll numbers to support their views?"

Add 'em up, they don't equal 100%. This isn't an uncommon occurrence here in the states, this shit happens everyday. And the problem is... the general populace laps it right up without even noticing.

I stopped watching the news on a regular basis last year.

[Atom]

I watch The News Hour on PBS and BBC World News, but for very different reasons than most people I think, I study them, sorta like how I watch infomercials, I actually study them, I find it both amusing and eerily satisfying. lol

[Atom]

It's possible I suppose that they're flashing images between the words, of Quarter Pounders and stuff.. you know.

[vectro]

For a different perspective on the news, at least when it comes to international news, I would suggest the World Service radio broadcasts from the BBC. It don't get better than that.

I'll give that a try. Is there a webcast?

[Atom]

Well I think it's a damned shame about Billy Mays, I think he'd have made a fine newscaster.

[Brian]

I have to agree with the BBC recommendations. They are on top of their game :)

[Atom]

One thing I noticed about BBC WN is that they don't mince words, but of course you still need to read between the lines.

[Halo]

http://i.imgur.com/abMQe.jpg

Am I still being manipulated? Is there more that I'm not seeing? Is there a gun pointing at the man with the gun? Is there a Mexican stand off? Is that gun there for the man's protection or to be pointed at him? Are they forcing him to drink poison or giving him some water because he's thirsty?

So many questions, so much unknown.:sqerr:

[Strong]

I'll give that a try. Is there a webcast?

Try the BBC World Service - Home page (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/), you should be able to access the webcasts from there. :sqwink:

[Atom]

Looks like I was right in my post #7 about the previous page being thrown if the OP was quoted, Halo. I'll figure out what the exact width threshold is one of these times when I have the ambition.