First: When people don't beliefe any more whats printet or said in media, they won't pay for it any more.
Second: that's your opinion. Third: I didn't want to take the position of any party or wing. Take the example of the US: Do you want all media be like Fox News? -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 13:03 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Dogmatism: what is allowed? first, you didn't answer the question: "why media wouln't work any more without that goal?" second, yes, there are two kinds of journalism: the ones that cover the news no one would pay them to distort (basebal games and flower expos), and the one that covers the "interesting" news. i wouldn't put much faith in *any* party newspaper: cuban russian, US, UK... and, honestly, i doubt cuba is worse than US in this regard: a lie is a lie is a lie. best, mishka On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:49:45 +0100, Michael Heim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK. There's different kind of journalists, or journalism. > The ones that feel htat they want to tell stories, want to show "how > the world is". They should have tho goal to be as near at reality as > possible. The you have political journalism (in a wider sense). Those > journalists want to change something, want to be the world a little > bit like they want. That starts at a daily newspaper with a light > political direction and ends at a kampfblatt (propaganda) from either > left or right end of the range. But would you beliefe what's printed > in a cuban party newspaper? > > So. It doesnt matter how hard, but in a way, every journalist should > be willing to stay at the trouth. He shoult try. > > Michael > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 02:53 > An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Betreff: Re: AW: Dogmatism: what is allowed? > > why? > > mishka
