Seriously? I opens a pandora box.
Backstabbing, sabotaging employees should be shown the boot. They are a cancer.
Who cares what they feel or feel they are entitled to? A person who has never run a business has no idea what their actual value is.
The difference between this thread and others is that it didn’t start with a lie or conspiracy. That is what prompts me to ask for proof. I don’t know any of you personally, so it isn’t personal. I just like a health conversation that includes facts where necessary.
Either way, thanks for the comment. This is how I normally enter a conversation. It also helps that I agree with your OP. This is not the right way to go about this. We need to fight blatant discrimination and let the fact that companies discriminate a competitive advantage for others.
Public salary ranges would help with that
Baa Ram Ewe !..
2 Likes
Think about what you are saying.
My local newspaper OP was me opining about the one sided reporting I perceive in my local paper. That was simply my observation; an opinion. It wasn’t a lie nor was it a conspiracy. Since you have no earthly idea where I live or what local paper I read, what could you possibly have been thinking when you jumped in demanding that I provide proof that a positive Trump story wasn’t covered?
Your post was both confrontational and disrespectful, while having nothing to do with the spirit of my OP. I don’t want to rehash the discussion in that thread here, but would like to clarify one other item.
In regards to positive or negative coverage, what does that even mean? From my perspective, it isn’t so much about a particular event but how the facts surrounding that event are spun. For instance, when the President gives a speech about some policy or proposed plan, his supporters will generally receive his comments in a positive light while his detractors will generally receive them in a negative light. That is to be expected.
By and large, journalists are expected to be unbiased. Thus an objective journalist would report the factual information from the speech and maybe interview both supporters and detractors for their thoughts. The resulting piece would be a fair and balanced report on the event, devoid of any personal opinion the journalist might have.
Where this falls apart is where journalists report the facts and then spin those facts to support their own personal bias. It has been demonstrated that 90% of the reporting on Trump fits that model. With my OP I was simply offering my observation that my local paper tends to navigate towards those heavily biased stories.
I really don’t want to debate this here, but would be more than happy to try again back in my local paper thread, if you can keep it civil.
2 Likes