Comments on: Wikinews? Stinks? http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/ General interest observations and true web-log. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:16:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: K B http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/comment-page-1/#comment-12492 K B Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:15:10 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=1490#comment-12492 "...does it make you think that you really must come back tomorrow if you want to know what’s going on in the world?" I was trying to think of *any* source of which this is true. I find that I *do* have to comb local newspapers daily to keep up to speed on what is happening, but other than that I can think of no other source that isn't being duplicated somewhere else. TV network news is just foreign to me, national and local. Can't figure out why anyone watches any of it. Prince Charles gets married. Queen won't come. Michael Jackson is in trouble. Janet's breast pops out. Who cares????? “…does it make you think that you really must come back tomorrow if you want to know what’s going on in the world?”

I was trying to think of *any* source of which this is true. I find that I *do* have to comb local newspapers daily to keep up to speed on what is happening, but other than that I can think of no other source that isn’t being duplicated somewhere else. TV network news is just foreign to me, national and local. Can’t figure out why anyone watches any of it. Prince Charles gets married. Queen won’t come. Michael Jackson is in trouble. Janet’s breast pops out. Who cares?????

]]> By: Richard http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/comment-page-1/#comment-12391 Richard Wed, 02 Mar 2005 00:40:06 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=1490#comment-12391 Awh, its not that bad cut them some slack... Awh, its not that bad cut them some slack…

]]> By: Robert http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/comment-page-1/#comment-12270 Robert Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:59:20 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=1490#comment-12270 It's "just between you and me". PS: Thanks for your coverage of science and religion. You're right, academics don't do enough. It’s “just between you and me”.

PS: Thanks for your coverage of science and religion. You’re right, academics don’t do enough.

]]> By: Jim http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/comment-page-1/#comment-12243 Jim Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:16:58 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=1490#comment-12243 Nothing is perfect, Wikinews included. I don't see how you are going to get bumped from the net for being critical of wikinews John. Wikinews is good for being critical of the news and seeing who gets bumped off the air or gets put out of print. Wiki is a tool, but you still have your inks and papers and boob tubes. Wikinews seems like a good bullshit detecting device, depending on how it is used. There's a ton of bullshit on wiki too. Wikinews is a double edged sword. It looks like a great tool for propaganda or finding propaganda out. It won't eliminate paper. It's good that you are making people think about wikinews. I use it, but it isn't like it is AP or the New York Times. Wikinews is kind of like a shotgun. AP and the Times are more like sniper rifles. If you are just shooting birds, wikinews is fine. If you want to hunt big game, go with AP and the Times. Each may play by his own rules if he things the game itself is good. It's like anything else, used for good and evil. You really can't beat paper while sitting on the can. We have a shitty local newspaper full of propaganda. It depends on the paper I guess. Wikinews depends on the propaganda. You still have to be able to think and reason, which no paper or wiki can do for you. Fraud is fraud. The news is full mistakes and people make errors. Dumb is dumb. That's life. Nothing is perfect, Wikinews included. I don’t see how you are going to get bumped from the net for being critical of wikinews John. Wikinews is good for being critical of the news and seeing who gets bumped off the air or gets put out of print. Wiki is a tool, but you still have your inks and papers and boob tubes. Wikinews seems like a good bullshit detecting device, depending on how it is used. There’s a ton of bullshit on wiki too. Wikinews is a double edged sword. It looks like a great tool for propaganda or finding propaganda out. It won’t eliminate paper. It’s good that you are making people think about wikinews. I use it, but it isn’t like it is AP or the New York Times. Wikinews is kind of like a shotgun. AP and the Times are more like sniper rifles. If you are just shooting birds, wikinews is fine. If you want to hunt big game, go with AP and the Times. Each may play by his own rules if he things the game itself is good. It’s like anything else, used for good and evil. You really can’t beat paper while sitting on the can. We have a shitty local newspaper full of propaganda. It depends on the paper I guess. Wikinews depends on the propaganda. You still have to be able to think and reason, which no paper or wiki can do for you. Fraud is fraud. The news is full mistakes and people make errors. Dumb is dumb. That’s life.

]]> By: The Tea Man http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2005/02/28/simonwaldmannet-wikinewsu2026dare-i-say-what-i-think/comment-page-1/#comment-12191 The Tea Man Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:00:04 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=1490#comment-12191 Hold the front page! Blogger notices the word "NEW" in "NEWS" ... ! As Hank says, the indictment _could_ apply to print and TV journalism as there's very little investigative work being done any more. However if you measure the relative number of scoops "old" journalism is doing almost all the work. Hold the front page! Blogger notices the word “NEW” in “NEWS” … !

As Hank says, the indictment _could_ apply to print and TV journalism as there’s very little investigative work being done any more. However if you measure the relative number of scoops “old” journalism is doing almost all the work.

]]>