BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Latest fake news...
Track this topic - Email this topic - Print this topic - Download this topic - Subscribe to this forum
vidsanta
post Nov 25 2017, 07:33 AM
Post #1
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 20,289
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


I'm surprised the Guardian published this story.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/...d-as-he-or-lord

https://www.thelocal.se/20171124/no-the-swe...ale-pronoun-god


This post has been edited by vidcapper: Nov 25 2017, 07:33 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Klampus
post Nov 25 2017, 10:04 AM
Post #2
wtf are perfect places
******
Group: Entertainment Mod
Posts: 12,611
Member No.: 17,160
Joined: 3-June 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-51...-words-God.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Nov 25 2017, 10:26 AM
Post #3
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Admin.
Posts: 23,622
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Why would the Guardian not publish it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brett-Butler
post Nov 25 2017, 10:50 AM
Post #4
Howdy, disco citizens.
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 9,154
Member No.: 10,455
Joined: 16-January 10
   No Gallery Pics
 


It was one of those stories that was tailored made to appeal to so many people's own cognitive biases, be it towards Sweden, Protestants or otherwise, so I'm not surprised it was misreported and not put into its proper context.

One of my bugbears about modern journalism is that so many of them are incapable of reporting accurately when it comes to religious matters, something which can either be chalked down to unawareness or ignorance of the subject matter (if we're being generous), up to downright hostility (if we're not). And unfortunately I have to say that even BBC struggles in this department - there's been two major clangers that they dropped in relation to Catholicism that they wouldn't have made had they had more people on staff that knew a thing or two about the subject matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidsanta
post Nov 25 2017, 11:35 AM
Post #5
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 20,289
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Nov 25 2017, 10:26 AM) *
Why would the Guardian not publish it?


Because they usually turn a blind eye to examples of PC.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Nov 25 2017, 12:19 PM
Post #6
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Admin.
Posts: 23,622
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Nov 25 2017, 11:35 AM) *
Because they usually turn a blind eye to examples of PC.

No they don't. OTOH, they do tend to check such stories more thoroughly than certain other papers. Therefore, they are less likely to print stories that turn out to be a load of rubbish (Winterval, Ba-Baa Green Sheep etc.).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post


Reply to this topicStart new topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th December 2017 - 07:08 PM