Little Green Footballs

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Charles, reality clash in blogosphere

OK, I'll admit it. Charles has a somewhat of a scoop with this post. The Associated Press did make a hash of this headline:




You got 'em Chuckles. Somebody in AP wrote a frankly awful headline. But hey, don't you notice something Charles? Don't you spot something sadly lacking in your coverage? While you're hyperventilating about a headline another thing continued to happen on Wednesday the 24th of January 2007 that AP and other news agencies covered. In fact they covered it in the piece with the sucky headline. That's right Charles, the Iraq War. Remember that? How is that war you supported from behind your monitor so valiantly going?

Oh.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't get it, your post does not even address Charles post that you are referring too...

The only thing I can derive is your angry that Charles is posting about a particular news story....

uhh....isn't that what your doing with Charles site with *this* post?

Anonymous said...

Yes it does. Charles has a point about there being a mistake in the headline. Big Wow! Is it bias or a bad headline?

The point of the post is to ridicule his coverage of Iraq, where only the MSM get a rough ride while he completely ignores the disaster that is unfolding there.

Charles is a joke.

MJ said...

The point of the post was to point out the rather tragic attempt at reporting Charles makes himself. A pro-war blogger who's only coverage of Iraq is pointing out badly written AP headlines is really clutching at straws.

Anonymous said...

Oh I see, the point was to illustrate the triviality of that particular post on LGF. I wonder what that makes this post?

Oh the irony.

***

interestingly enough, that 'trivial' post on LGF was not 'trivial' enough.

The headline was changed....

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/01/24/shameless-ap-journalistic-crime-of-the-day/

I guess those straws Charles was clutching mattered enough for a re-write....

cokane said...

the post definitely deal with charles's coverage of the MSM. LGF has definitely tried to persuade readers that it is some sort of antidote to the MSM (some liztards even go so far as to demand everyone at reuters be executed or imprisoned)

But what would our coverage of Iraq look like without MSM reporters?

Do a search on LGF for "Iraq" and you will see the true Orwellian possibility.

Anonymous said...

I guess those straws Charles was clutching mattered enough for a re-write....

AP rewriting a bad headline vs. 'Celeb' pro-war, anti-Muslim blogger ignoring the carnage in Iraq?? Jeez, I wonder which is more worthy of a post?

Wow, those AP people must be quaking in their boots, eh?

Listen it's easy,(by the way, how does a person with one head manage to be so stupid?), if yesterday, the best story you can dredge up about Iraq is a badly structured headline whilst people are being slaughtered, troops are being lost and the entire country is disintegrating......then you're eitehr a partisan Republican hack or very fucking stupid. Or both.

PS The point of this post as stressed before wasn't to just point out the triviality of Chuck's post. It was to point out his absolute idiocy in making a big deal about a poorly written headline and completely ignoring the consequences of the war he cheered on.

Anonymous said...

You're making the classic mistake. You're forgetting the standard response by LGF and other right wing sites

MSM = Terror enabling treason monkeys

Poorly executed headlines = proof

War on Terror = fantastic victory

Bush = our nation's sweetheart

Anonymous said...

AP rewriting a bad headline vs. 'Celeb' pro-war, anti-Muslim blogger ignoring the carnage in Iraq?? Jeez, I wonder which is more worthy of a post?

Wow, those AP people must be quaking in their boots, eh?


Nobody said AP is scared, what I did say was the headline was confusing enough to warrent a re-write.

Listen it's easy,(by the way, how does a person with one head manage to be so stupid?), if yesterday, the best story you can dredge up about Iraq is a badly structured headline whilst people are being slaughtered, troops are being lost and the entire country is disintegrating......then you're eitehr a partisan Republican hack or very fucking stupid. Or both.

LGF, posts many stories in a day (unlike this site). This particular one about AP is one of many of that day. You may feel that it was the most important one of the posts that day, but I don't see Charles donoting any of his stories as the "Top" story of the day.

As for partisanship, of course LGF is partisan, the same way this site is leftist. LGF does not try to say it's on the left or the middle, it's always clearly associated itself with conservative organizations.

PS The point of this post as stressed before wasn't to just point out the triviality of Chuck's post. It was to point out his absolute idiocy in making a big deal about a poorly written headline

As I pointed out before - Charles "trivial" critique on AP, was not trivial enough since AP had a re-write. That would prove Charles's point wouldn't it?

You have the right to disagree whether the post was trivial; you can disagree with Charles and the AP re-writers - that of course is your right.

...and completely ignoring the consequences of the war he cheered on.

MSM media and leftists blogs does a good job letting us know about the horrors and setbacks of the Iraq war. The left likes to emphasize any setbacks America suffers, the right likes to emphasize the victories America achieves. That's just the current state of political presentation.

Anonymous said...

I would say a more accurate viewpoint of conservatives is the following:

MSM = biased toward the left

Poorly executed headlines = proof of that bias

War on Terror = must be taken seriously.

Bush = made a lot of mistakes, but not-preoccupied on paiting him the anti-christ.

Anonymous said...

"As I pointed out before - Charles "trivial" critique on AP, was not trivial enough since AP had a re-write. That would prove Charles's point wouldn't it?"

No it wouldn't and pointing out AP's grammatical error wasn't the point of Chuck's post at all.

"the right likes to emphasize the victories America achieves"

So that's why coverage of Iraq on LGF's been strangely absent.

"Poorly executed headlines = proof of that bias"

Please tell me you don't work in law enforcement. If you do we're all fucked.

Anonymous said...

"shameless-ap-journalistic-crime-of-the-day"

So a bungled headline is a crime to these people?

Anonymous said...

Yes it is. Remember it was 'those' people who told us that Abu Grahib was not torture, that Jews were about to be forced to wear Yellow Star's in Iran and that Pajamas Media was going to rival the MSM and be the dawn of a new age of citizen journalists...

Anonymous said...

No it wouldn't and pointing out AP's grammatical error wasn't the point of Chuck's post at all.

Yup, Chuck's point was that MSM is biased.

Please tell me you don't work in law enforcement. If you do we're all fucked.

It doesn't take a genious to acknowledge that MSM media by and large is slanted left. Be intellectually honest. I can acknowledge the WSJ, FOX and Talk Radio is slanted right...

So that's why coverage of Iraq on LGF's been strangely absent.

Actually, LGF and other conservative sites often highlight positive news stories about Iraq. Definitely a lot more then say *this* site or Daily Kos.

So a bungled headline is a crime to these people?

Nope, as I stated before - it was shown as an example of Media bias.

Anonymous said...

"Nope, as I stated before - it was shown as an example of Media bias"

No it shows somebody made a mess of a headline.

Anonymous said...

Actually, LGF and other conservative sites often highlight positive news stories about Iraq.

Considering the number of Arabs who are dying in Iraq, every day is probably sunshine lolliop and candy day for Chuckie and his little neocon peanut gallery of cheetoh stained mouth foaming racists.

Maybe they can hold hands and sing.

"I love you and you love me
and we love car swarms le de de."

Or maybe

"It's a beautiful day in my settlement
a beautiful day in my bibically donated land
and it's all mine you dirty arab
it's all mine"

"It's a bulldozerly day in my stolen land
a neighborly day for a crushed moonbat
and it's all mine
it's all mine"

I have never wanted to have a dirty Arab neighbor like you
I have never wanted to share the land with an untermenchen like you.

So let's not make the most of this beautiful day
Since we're together we might as well say
get out
get the fuck out
get the motherfucking hell out
you dirty arab."

Anonymous said...

hey lgf retard i dont think u know how "bias" works.

If a democrat president had led us into the war in iraq who would have covered it differently?

Fox News

that's it

Bias isn't about a fucked up headline, it's about the stories you chose to cover.

Anonymous said...

Considering the number of Arabs who are dying in Iraq, every day is probably sunshine lolliop and candy day for Chuckie and his little neocon peanut gallery of cheetoh stained mouth foaming racists.

My, what a intelligent post.

Right...the goal of every member of LGF (and conservatives for that matter) is to kill Arabs.

Just like all liberals are smelly hippies.

However, please tell me more about your poams....the first part you imply the conservative goal is to kill Arabs, I believe the second part of the thesis is that the West wants to take Arab lands? Did we take land from South Korea? Japan? Germany? Panama? Grenada? Italy?

But you have every right to believe what Muslim extremists say is the goal of the United States - to wage war against Islam and take all the land in the Middle East.

Anonymous said...

hey lgf retard i dont think u know how "bias" works.

If a democrat president had led us into the war in iraq who would have covered it differently?

Fox News

that's it


Yes, I know liberals don't acnowledge that the Media slants left...However, I find it odd you bring up Fox News, when I already demonstrated intellectualy honesty and mentioned that Fox, (like WSJ and Radio) slants right.

Bias isn't about a fucked up headline, it's about the stories you chose to cover.

I acknowledge the headline may just have been a gramatical error. But to believe that MSM has no bias, (yet fox does) in my opinion is not realistic.

Anonymous said...

No it shows somebody made a mess of a headline.

Quite possibly true. But a mess is still a mess.