The Obamessiah

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Bobdude161, Jul 27, 2008.

  1. MacHipster macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago/London/Sydney
    #2
    As soon as I saw the Fox News Channel and Hannity and Colmes logos, I knew I was in store for something incredibly stupid. I was right.
     
  2. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    When will Americans learn that the newspaper is called The Times and not The London Times or The Times of London. You'd think that Fox News would know better, with them being owned by the same person. :rolleyes:

    P.S. I read Mr. Baker's rather poor attempt at humour yesterday.
     
  3. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Corvallis, Oregon
    #4
    BoyBach: I think they call it "The Times of London" because we have our own Times--The New York Times. Seems reasonable to me to ensure nobody gets confused.
     
  4. MacHipster macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago/London/Sydney
    #5
    Probably around the time the Brits realize the world doesn't revolve around their newspaper. In the video, the narrator says, "...for he saw it all on CNN, the BBC, and in the pages of The New York Times."
     
  5. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #6
    Apart from the fact it actually does.

    ***** video, though. Not funny.
     
  6. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #7

    One paper is called 'The New York Times' and another is called 'The Times'. It's not difficult. There's no excuse for a news organisation to get this simple fact wrong, unless this is an acceptable standard for journalism now?
     
  7. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #8
    They have standards in journalism!!! When did this happen!!!
     
  8. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #9

    Sometime in the eighteenth century I believe! ;)
     
  9. MacHipster macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago/London/Sydney
    #10
    I was raised in the US. At no point do I recall The Times being relevant as compared to The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, The Washington Post, etc.

    Can you point out in the video where it called The New York Times The Times? Actually can you point out in the video where The Times is mentioned at all?
     
  10. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #11
    I must have been getting confused with moral standards :p
     
  11. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #12

    Picture 1.png
    The very first second.

    Mr. Baker writes for them.
     
  12. MacHipster macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago/London/Sydney
    #13
  13. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #14

    I apologise that I 'kept on', but getting quotes and sources correct is fundamental to journalism - good and bad.
     
  14. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #15
    Not trying to be contrary... but how would you propose the US press refer to "The Times" (based in London) in order to avoid confusion with the "New York Times?" Just calling each by their proper name does not avoid the confusion in the US public's mind. If it is just referred to as "the Times" here in the States, the natural assumption would be the NY Times. How would you distinguish them?

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  15. yojitani macrumors 68000

    yojitani

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Location:
    An octopus's garden
    #16
    Boy, this is terrible... I kept waiting for some nice jibe, but nothing. This isn't satire, it's just... dumb.
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    Oh please- anyone wondering where the OP is? Oh wait- laughing at the uproar he's supposedly caused. This is stupid and ridiculous BS. Let's pay it no mind. This is the kind of BS neocons love.
     
  17. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #18
    What you fail to consider is that in the US, we call The New York Times The Times for short.

    Before going on your next tirade, I suggest thinking about cultural factors at work. ;) :)
     
  18. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #19

    Gerard Baker was reading aloud his column originally printed in 'The Times', so the Fox News Channel should have correctly attributed the piece to 'The Times' and not some fictional newspaper called 'The Times of London'. It's not cultural, it's factual.

    (Tirade over! :D ;) )
     
  19. Bobdude161 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Bobdude161

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Location:
    N'Albany, Indiana
    #20
    The only kind of uproar I caused was how to correctly label 'The Times'. As for being called a neocon, that's being prejudice. How do you know who I am? I laugh at videos making fun of conservatives. Does that make me a liberal?

    If you should know, I'm libertarian and I don't like much of the two candidates. Thank you, good night.

    EDIT: And if me making fun of Obama has offended you, I'm sorry.
     
  20. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #21
    Awe, don't let Lee get to you... he's harmless


    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    Making fun of people is just fine. Posting inane garbage is just...well inane. It would be no more funny if it were McCain.
     
  22. Cleverboy macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #23
    In all fairness, this was MUCH funnier, when it was just words, and you could skip over the parts that got weighed down and belabored. Listening to the whole thing with innocuous video clips wasn't half as funny as I thought it would be (in fact, my smile dissappeared about 10-15 seconds into it). It's like a bad version of a Daily Show gag.

    The most bothersome aspect of this, were all the people trying to character-assassinate Obama supporters in comment sections of the original article (as if they simply don't "get it" or that many of them didn't think it funny... at first). After a while, I thought referring to Obama as "the child" didn't quite hold up, and started to become offensive. Even were this really writing about the Christ figure, if someone gets older, it doesn't make since to keep calling him "the child" when he's over 40 years old, especially when you've grounded yourself in the past tense and not the future tense for the entirety of the article. Kind of F-d up.

    ~ CB
     

Share This Page