Media goes into paroxysms of joy and fury

October 9, 2016 • 9:30 am

by Grania

Depending on what side of the fence you are on this election cycle, you probably read at least one of the following sites from time to time, if only because your friends and family on Facebook keep posting links to one or the other.

This is not a claim that either Breitbart or Huffington Post are serious news outlets. But they are well read by the electorate. The only point I am trying to make is that these sources wouldn’t know “fair and balanced” if it bit them in the ass.

It is interesting to compare the two if only to see how they covered the two scandals over the weekend: Trump’s p*ssygate and Clinton’s Speechgate.

Surprisingly enough, Breitbart appears to be offering a slightly more balanced coverage. (Who’da thunk?)

breitbart

 

Breitbart hates Hillary Clinton and loves Donald Trump. But they have at a glance covered both stories, even if delving into the comments means wading through spittle-flecked invective and delusional conspiracy theories.

In contrast, Huffington Post has gone into a full-blown orgy on Trump. To read anything about Clinton you have to scroll way down the page. Way, way, way down the page. Past article after article on Trump.

puffho

Pretty much every single one of those disjointed phrases links to a separate article on Trump.

Keep scrolling down the front page and you get more articles on Trump (there are more than in this screengrab).

still-scrolling

And then finally, scrolling and scrolling and scrolling down – about four fifths of the way down; you finally get the news on Clinton. It’s worth going over to HuffPo just to see how far down the front page you have to go just to get to this story.

finally

This is located about one fifth from the bottom of the page. If her opponent was anyone else, the Wikileaks revelation would be recognised as pretty serious stuff. If you were relying on the HuffPo for your news, you could be forgiven for missing this story completely as it is virtually buried under a pile of Trump stories. This coverage is anything but fair and balanced.

Finally an aside on HuffPo (and others’) reference to Trump’s “lewd” remarks; Russell Blackford makes an important point.

https://twitter.com/Metamagician/status/784925228333867008

https://twitter.com/Metamagician/status/784930496429985792

https://twitter.com/Metamagician/status/784930859728056320

Breaking News: Jesus now in Texas

July 16, 2015 • 8:00 am

by Grania

On the side of a cow trailer.

My only comment on this is: how does this become a news item at all? It’s not like even the news team believes it to be real, whether or not they may profess to be Real Christians™ themselves.

Even they are basically yukking it up at the imaginings of an emotionally compromised individual and her family who are lapping up every bit of attention they can get.

It’s kind of the 21st century equivalent of the old Victorian era freak show.

Yes, some people will get a warm and fuzzy message out of it; although you could get a message out of Harry Potter too without anyone feeling the pressing need to call the local press and share the good news.

Mostly, it’s a tawdry peep show for people to point and roll their eyeballs at, and I guess the media will keep reporting on it while people keep gawping and laughing.

Jesus

Hat-tip: Joyce

Jeffrey Tayler’s Salon Sunday Secular Sermon

June 8, 2015 • 1:20 pm

by Grania Spingies

Don’t miss the weekly S4  homily by Brother Tayler over at Salon. This week he examined the pained and faintly hostile treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali by Jon Stewart and contrasts it with Stewart’s rather fawning enthusiasm for Reza Aslan revisionist version of reality.

You should read it just for the pleasure of sentences like this:

Stewart, so inquisitorial toward Hirsi Ali, let Aslan ejaculate this postmodern flapdoodle with impunity, and convivially wiped up after him with blather about non-religious causes for violence in the Middle East.

Taylor ponders the same thing that has been debated in this website from time to time: why self-professing liberal leftists are so quick to condemn and distance themselves from the ideas of a brave woman who left Islam and opposes its treatment by extremist, politicized adherents of Muslim women and the majority of peaceful followers of Muslim.

It is a puzzle. Why do people prefer the words of a smiling man who tells them that extremists don’t have anything to do with Islam over the words of an intelligent woman who says that the problem is complicated and the solution may require multiple avenues of discussion and reform? In short: are liberals afraid of the It’s Complicated button?  Or do liberals just tend towards the See No Evil position by default and champion anyone who tells then there is nothing to see here, move along?

BBC hosts debate on whether and where the Dalai Lama will reincarnate

March 25, 2015 • 9:25 am

What the bloody hell is up with the BBC? Reader Steve (with the side comment “fookin idjits!”) called my attention to a discussion on the BBC News site in which four people debate whether and where the present Dalai Lama will reincarnate. That’s like the Beeb having a serious debate on whether Xenu stored preserved humans in volcanoes before blowing them up with hydrogen bombs, and whether Paul Haggis is still afflicted with thetans.

This is all because the present Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso—in exile in India—has affirmed that he will refuse to reincarnate in Tibet, and therefore may be the last Dalai Lama. In response, the Chinese government has insisted that the 15th and next Dalai Lama will indeed reincarnate in Tibet.

This is all hilarious stuff, but also shows that the common assertion that Gyatso is down with science is completely bogus.  He believes in reincarnation, for crying out loud!

Anyway, here are a few inadvertently rib-tickling excerpts from the BBC debate.

Chonpen Tsering: Reincarnation process must not be manipulated

Chonpen Tsering is the Dalai Lama’s representative in northern Europe.

“The lamas – the senior religious figures – are able to determine firstly whether they are reborn, and if they are going to be reborn, where they’ll be reborn.

“The present carnation, the present Dalai Lama, can decide. The rebirth is his choice.

*******

Jia Xiudong: Dalai Lama is playing a political game

Jia Xiudong is senior research fellow at the China Institute of international studies in Beijing.

“I believe that the tradition will be maintained [and] the Dalai Lama will be reincarnated.

“There’s a role for the current Dalai Lama to play for the reincarnation, but I believe he should not exaggerate that role.

“For example, he just cannot stop the tradition individually.

“It is tradition passed from centuries ago.

*******

Robert Barnett: China wants a ‘tame’ lama

Robert Barnett is director of the Modern Tibet Studies Programme at Columbia University in New York.

“I think we have to look at all of this as negotiating moves on both sides. So the Dalai Lama is making these speculative, philosophical statements about, ‘I might be coming back, I might not. I might come back as a woman.’

“This is his normal method as a Buddhist teacher of the kind that he is to make people think. But it’s also a negotiating move with the Chinese to expose them to the kind of ridicule that they’ve put themselves in now by claiming to be able to arbitrate on matters like religion and reincarnation.

“This Dalai Lama has been so effective as a religious leader, even more so than as a political leader, that there’s going to be huge force among his followers for him to come back. So it’s quite likely that it’s going to happen.”

*******

Jamyang Norbu: Dalai Lama must reincarnate for the sake of Tibet’s future

Tibetan writer and activist Jamyang Norbu fell out of favour with the present Dalai Lama when he criticised his “softly softly” approach to China.

“He doesn’t have much of a choice. The lama’s reincarnating is a political institution.

“It’ll have to be the choice of the Tibetan government in exile and of the people.

“China will have their candidate up and running, and you can be 100% sure that they will.

“They’ll just pick some Tibetan kid who looks cute enough and they’ll put him up there and they’ll say, ‘This is the Dalai Lama.’

“If we don’t have our own candidate from the general Tibetan Buddhist world, then they win by proxy.

*******

And my own addition:

Professor Ceiling Cat: This is all insane.

I’ve been to Tibet, and it’s sad to see the systematic dismantling of Tibetan culture by the Han Chinese. When I visited monasteries, monks would furtively ask me if I could give them a picture of the Dalai Lama (Gyatso), as those pictures are forbidden.

That said, if you know about the old Buddhist theocracy in Tibet, it was by no means a paradise. Further, Tibetan Buddhism is just as rife with superstition and delusion as any other faith. It is romanticized in the West, but that’s largely because the religion is being suppressed by the Chinese government.

One of those superstitions is reincarnation, and here it’s being used in a political chess game between Tibetan Buddists, the Dalai Lama, and the Chinese government. There is, of course, no way to prove that any child born, whether he be in Tibet, India, or elsewhere, is a reincarnated Dalai Lama, though Buddhists do have some “tests” (seeing, for instance, if a kid recognize objects belonging to the last Dalai Lama).

I can’t resolve this problem, but I can add two things. First, the Dalai Lama is given undue respect. He’s the Pope of Buddhism, and though he’s pretty friendly to science, still believes in superstitions like reincarnation and karma. But in general he does follow the physician’s dictum: “First do no harm.” Second, the BBC is crazy to host a debate like this. They can write an article about the fracas, and give the different opinions, but they needn’t have people taking reincarnation seriously. If they do, they could at least write a disclaimer: “Note: There is no reliable evidence for a human soul, nor for the fact that it can leave the body of a dead person and install itself into a child.”