L.A. Times will no longer print letters that deny climate change

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by mocgator, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. mocgator
    Offline

    mocgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    6,315
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The ATL
    Ratings Received:
    +519
    The government medial complex rolls on. This is George Orwell at it's finest. "We'll tell you what to think and believe." It's now OK to censor opinions or facts when you don't agree with them or they don't fit your agenda. Especially when there is a mountain of empirical evidence proving that the Global Warming extremists are wrong.

    http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...onger-print-letters-that-deny-climate-change/

    The Los Angeles Times will no longer publish letters from climate change deniers, Times letters editor Paul Thornton wrote earlier this month.

    “Simply put, I do my best to keep errors of fact off the letters page; when one does run, a correction is published,” Thornton wrote. “Saying ‘there’s no sign humans have caused climate change’ is not stating an opinion, it’s asserting a factual inaccuracy.”

    “Thornton’s decision could well leave a few editors wondering if they should follow suit,” Graham Readfearn writes in the Guardian.

    Elaine McKewon, the author of an Australian study of newspaper coverage of climate change, told Readfern she hoped the Times’ decision would give “other mainstream media outlets the courage to stop appeasing the climate denial noise machine.”
  2. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    32,574
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,280
    Pravda-West has spoken and Communism is the next rule of law.
  3. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    31,406
    Likes Received:
    336
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,605
    what? they won't run letters with factual inaccuracies? That's Orwellian! That's Pravda! That's Communism!!!!
  4. JohnC1908
    Offline

    JohnC1908 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    22,063
    Likes Received:
    777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Neptune Beach, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +786
    If that were only the case. Lots of questions on this subject and to only print what they agree with seems to be a bit shady.
  5. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    22,573
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,416
    Why "shady?" The LA Times is a private entity. If they wanted to, they could just print pictures of cats, or do away with the "letters to the editor" section altogether. Its certainly within their rights to set the ground rules in their own forum, in this case the terms of debate adhering to a consensus view among scientists.
  6. fredsanford
    Offline

    fredsanford VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    159
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,058
    Nor should they print letters that defy the existence of gravity.
  7. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    31,406
    Likes Received:
    336
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,605
    but what if, deeply in your heart, you're convinced that gravity does not exist and claims of it are simply a communist plot? or maybe a muslim one?

    Actually, I'm not sure I agree with the Times on this. But eventually, you have to draw a line. The Times-Union is still running letters claiming that Congress is exempt from the ACA.
  8. harwil
    Offline

    harwil Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +130
    Is this still owned by Sam Zell, or has it gone through bankruptcy?
  9. G8trGr8t
    Online

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    13,891
    Likes Received:
    946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    SW Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +1,872
    the definition of fact seems to be a subjective one though and when it comes to global warming the only fact is that a LOT of people have made a LOT of money from the public that could have been put to productive uses but enriched those who presents theories as facts and then scramble to change the facts later when their theories prove to be inaccurate.

    Some people (quite a few in fact) would tell you it is a fact that Jesus is the son of god and the only way to not burn in he11 for eternity is to accept him as your personal savior. Should they quit printing editorials that espouse anything different?
  10. gatordowneast
    Offline

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,748
    Likes Received:
    303
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +985
    While there are many opinions on global warming, there is agreement on the cause of "smog" and Times employees have likely sucked down enough. Does that explain any of the nonsense?
  11. channingcrowderhungry
    Offline

    channingcrowderhungry Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,712
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Bottom of a pint glass
    Ratings Received:
    +632
    Similar to the time there was discussion about having separate sub forums on Too Hot for each political party, only a true fool would want to isolate themselves from opposing viewpoints, no matter how ignorant they think that viewpoint is.
  12. GatorFanCF
    Online

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +678
    * If it's a private enterprise they can do whatever they desire, good or bad as long as they're not violating law.
    * I give them credit for announcing their position rather than just stonewalling letters - at least you know
    * I have nothing more to add; but, it seems like a stronger position if there are 3 bullet points.
  13. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    32,574
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,280
    Nor is there the existence of trickle-up economics.
  14. gatorchamps0607
    Offline

    gatorchamps0607 Always Rasta

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Messages:
    39,980
    Likes Received:
    745
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Ft. Myers, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +1,710
    And how do you know its factually inaccurate? Ill keep it easy for you so you don't have to strain yourself, you don't.
  15. sappanama
    Offline

    sappanama VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,502
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +122
    can you link to those facts, not just an interpretation of data, but facts that are not assumptive and questionable. Now, I do think that we have an effect but I have not seen factual proof. The facts seem to be more on the side of natural cycles as the predominate player than co2 emissions due to cars and planes etc... otherwise why aren't the climate alarmists riding bikes and sailing across the seas rather than flying and using gas/diesel powered boats
  16. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    32,574
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,280
    It's narrow minded and set in stupidity.
  17. wygator
    Offline

    wygator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +767
    Classical logical fallacy of arguing from authority.

    Lazy way out.
  18. GatorRade
    Offline

    GatorRade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +571
    Well, it's better than the Daily Mail's strategy of simply reporting all climate studies as skeptical, regardless of their actual nature.
  19. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    412
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,764
    They won't run letters that blaspheme the church of climate change. Unless you are so utterly daft as to think climate change is on par with, I don't know, GRAVITY, then the word "consensus" only means science isn't taking place, yet this is the only word you hear climate change "scientists" say.
  20. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    412
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,764
    And lo and behold, someone so ignorant of science that they actually do think "climate change" is on par with gravity. That is "climate change", formerly global warming. Notice how gravity doesn't need to get renamed every 10 years to keep up with its imploding credibility.

Share This Page