It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


My "Grandmother", the news source.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:57 PM
Who's your Grandmother(GM)? The person you trust most in your life. She's always there for you and she's always right. The one you lean on. I was going to go with Mom but what I've seen goes WAY beyond "Yo Momma." You'd defend your GM with your life.

OK, what's the point? I see people treating news sources here as if they were a person's GM. Someone says something against her and it's battle lines. War has been declared and and you and your GM are our targets. Ridiculous.

People see anything said about Fox News or anyone of the other alphabet services as an attack not only on their person but that which they hold dear. Their GM, so to speak. Then we go into a radical, hate filled dialog that accomplishes nothing other than "who can insult the others GM the best". Again, ridiculous.

These are news services folks, not long lost relatives. NOW HERE'S THE REAL NEWS! Grandma ISN'T always right. No one is. Secondly, no one is always wrong. This childishness is not only polluting the board imo, it's also keeping people separated and NOT listening to what has to be said. OR NEEDS TO BE HEARD!

This is important imo because the fracture in America can't be mended until there comes a common ground and you sure aren't going to get there by playing, "My GM is better than your GM. Na-na-ne-nah-nah." Just think about this people.

Survey says we don't past the first page without excellent examples of what I'm talking about here. If I can get one person out of this mess, it's worth it though.

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:29 PM
This is definitely an issue that comprises a relevant part of the back and forth we see in the political threads...people do react to sources rather than some of the intricate aspects of a thread authors analysis at times.

And certainly some of the vehemence is as if a member of their own family is being attacked.

While I can see how familial passing down of political affiliations can have this effect, it is imperative that we here at ATS take the subject matter, whether it be provided by a personally agreeable source or not, and dissect the issues that are the point. Reacting to divisive rhetoric and assumptive interpretations of a party line need not take control of our quest for the truth.

There may be people here who are presenting political topics to further their own agenda, whatever it may be. But the spirit of ATS should make such a motivation moot (which I have seen plenty of times). A rational/logical dissection of a topical matter will indeed hammer out the relevance of a topic regardless of the source.

Let's not forget that many of us are in the same boat, regardless of political/economic affiliation...they are lying to us all the same. They are misrepresenting their campaign platforms by catering to corporate interest. The lines between individual partisanships is a distraction to the partnership of our government and corporation.

That is where we should be...

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:39 PM
My grandmother has Alzheimers, speaks only Spanish and can't read or write.

works pretty well as a metaphor for the news too, eh?

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:57 PM
Both you Mods bring up very important issues. It seems as if people take an educated debate and turn it into personal issues and attacks. I don't see a reason for this? However, there are people who feel the need to attack one's "GM", for whatever reason. I joined ATS because we as a community can express our experiences, events, and opinions.

I see bickering on posts all the time, when people should kindly reply with their opinions, and if necessary, with evidence. I love ATS. This is an amazing site. We have so much to offer, and there are new members daily.

So, I am asking all ATS users, please show some constraint to other members, and let's work together. After all, isn't that why we are here?

(MemoryShock - You may want to use 'easier' language for those not predominantly English speaking folks

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:06 PM
reply to post by intrepid

In case you didn't see

Look at the name of the boat

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:10 PM
reply to post by TortoiseKweek

This Ahab is looking for bigger things though. Like logic, thoughtfulness, understanding, a common ground?

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:20 PM
reply to post by intrepid

I understand completely. But how crazy is this - I'm from South Africa, and a Southern Whale trashes a boat called "Intrepid", and somehow a tourist manages to get a photo? I'm on ATS and a member here - who is from Canada, and the whale trashes a boat with an ATS member's name?!! And from my new country?? What are the odds???

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:19 PM
I think one of the reasons people get so defensive about Fox news is that some of us remember the choices we had in the media before it's arrival. Before Fox news, there were very few conservative voices especially on TV. I'm 34 and pre 96 I think maybe the only conservative with a show on CNN was maybe Robert Novak. William F Buckley had his magazine and was often syndicated and US News and World Report had a center right tilt, but that was it. I vividly remember the anchors from the majors in '94 using terms like "voter temper tantrum", "bitter voters", and other hyperbole after the '94 election. Compared to how left the MSM had become before the arrival of Fox, they actually seemed fair and balanced at the time.

Since the OP started with a analogy I'll use one of my own. Before Fox news it was like children (conservatives) living with a foster parent. Not the good kind either, it was the kind of foster parent that did it because of the check they got from the government. Finally prayers are answered and a blood relative appears to take us away from these horrible foster parents.And although this grandmother has her faults, she's still blood and no matter what she does they would rather run away than go back to those crappy foster parents.

Personally I don't watch Fox much anymore: too much opinion to little journalism and information. I do prefer Fox as the "voice of the opposition" rather than "cheerleader for the administration" like it was during the Bush years.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by jefwane]

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:44 PM
Since joining ATS this has been my biggest disappointment. Someone can post for example, I have a white Cadillac. Others will argue that the OP is racist for saying white, another will argue that the OP is not racist because he has a car that is traditionally a favorite of black people. The thread ends up with everyone arguing about some silly thing in the comment without discussing the comment itself.

Before anyone starts posting on this thread that my comment is racist, I used it for an example because it will induce that reaction.

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 05:25 AM
reply to post by intrepid

OK you have to forgive the fact my brain is still coming back from holiday mode . The problem is that the likes of CNN and Fox News are no longer news outlets instead they are merely opinion mouthpieces. So you really are just facing an extension of what is simple matters of differences in opinion. New Supreme Court justices who don't view the US as a corporation and third party in Congress would go a long towards helping the US out of its current mess . Neither will happen and I await the coming of a spate of domestic terrorism in the USA .

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 05:52 AM
I believe that people will attack a source based on the reputation of the source...attack MSNBC because it expresses the opinions of liberals, attack Fox because it expresses the opinions of conservatives.

That's all 'news' is anymore, whoever has the most opinionated commentator stirring the largest pot. We're a consumption based society, whomever has the loudest voice will be heard.

I will gladly attack a source, especially one that only comments rather than reports.

People lose faith in an organization when they read an article or see a clip that is opposing to their general point of view. "Commentator A was defending point B, I disagree with point B. Commentator A is biased." Well of course they are! They're only commentators, not reporters! The problem stems from commentators that blur the line between reporting and commentating.

I could go on and on about the merits of one organization over the other but I won't. I understand where you're coming from though...too many times I find myself scouring the internet to find a piece of legislation or find the particular wording of a specific quote or a video or first hand account of a situation because someone on THIS forum has complained about an action by some party that may not even be involved.

My GM was always there for me but wasn't always right, no one is always right.

new topics

top topics


log in