We're a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community. Your site provided us with valuable info to work on. You have done an impressive job and our whole community will be thankful to you.
A formidable share, I just given this onto a colleague who was doing just a little evaluation on this. And he the truth is purchased me breakfast as a result of I found it for him.. smile. So let me reword that: Thnx for the deal with! But yeah Thnkx for spending the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love studying extra on this topic. If potential, as you turn into experience, would you thoughts updating your blog with more particulars? It's extremely useful for me. Massive thumb up for this blog put up!
Just article, We liked its style and content. I discovered this blog on Yahoo and also have now additional it to my personal bookmarks. I’ll be certain to visit once again quickly.
Mr. Kurtz, you and your guest confused the issues: Ms. Jones did not "rip" the media, she objected to a COLUMNIST who wrote an OPINION PIECE that was harshly critical, and at a very inappropriate time. Yes, A reporter IS there to REPORT the news, not cheer in a partisan fashion, but that is NOT what Ms. Jones commented about.
Ms. Jones DOES have the right to expect that her country would not RIP her on the eve of competition. That writer has every right to his opinion, but he ought to exercise more judgment in when and how he expresses it. And perhaps it was actually misdirected: it is not Ms. Jones he was really criticizing, but the American public for their appetite for what gets reported about female athletes.
Bottom-line, you and your guest did your viewers a disservice by such a sleight-of-hand approach to the topic, obfuscating the purposes of reporters and op-ed writers. You owe Ms. Jones, and your viewers, an apology for misleading us and "piling on" to Ms. Jones.
Howard, Christine – are you familiar with track and field or athletics as they call it in London? Your comments today suggest you are not. The story of Lolo Jones didn’t start this year or last year. It started with her ascent to becoming the favorite for the 100 meter hurdles at the Beijing Olympics. She had the same looks then but she wasn’t the favorite based on her looks. In the heats of the Beijing Olympics she ran 12.43. That’s better than the new personal best of bronze medalist Kellie Wells. Sure she choked at Beijing, but it wouldn’t have been a choke if she hadn’t earned the status as favorite. Since those Olympics she set the American record in the indoor 60 meter hurdles at 7.72. Then she had back surgery, which made it a big challenge to make this year’s team. Times in events and surgery are facts. The article in the New York Times was opinion. Christine suggested the article by Jere Longman was in line with “American” media’s role of reporting on performance rather than cheerleading. How is an article titled “For Lolo Jones, Everything Is Image” and language that says “Essentially, Jones has decided she will be whatever anyone wants her to be — vixen, virgin, victim — to draw attention to herself and the many products she endorses” reporting on performance? Shame on you Jere for writing the article. Shame on you Christine for saying American media are better than those in the rest of the world but let a colleague pass an opinion piece off as fact based reporting. And shame on you Howard for not challenging Christine.
If people want to see the best athletes, they watch the men, not the women. So sex appeal is used to sell women's athletics. However, many women athletes are not that attractive. A substantial number are amazons. So, whenever a relatively attractive female athlete comes on the scene, she gets hyped. Then, however, unattractive women resent her. Animosity is the result.
Now more than ever, the press is a part of every story it covers. And CNN's "Reliable Sources" is one of television's only regular programs to examine how journalists do their jobs and how the media affect the stories they cover.
Brian Stelter is the host of "Reliable Sources" and the senior media correspondent for CNN Worldwide. Before he joined CNN in November 2013, Stelter was a media reporter for The New York Times. He is the author of the New York Times best-seller "Top of the Morning."
We're a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community. Your site provided us with valuable info to work on. You have done an impressive job and our whole community will be thankful to you.
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/
A formidable share, I just given this onto a colleague who was doing just a little evaluation on this. And he the truth is purchased me breakfast as a result of I found it for him.. smile. So let me reword that: Thnx for the deal with! But yeah Thnkx for spending the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love studying extra on this topic. If potential, as you turn into experience, would you thoughts updating your blog with more particulars? It's extremely useful for me. Massive thumb up for this blog put up!
http://www.detrials.net
http://mewkid.net/when-is-xuxlya3/ – Amoxicillin Buy Amoxicillin jzf.quoa.reliablesources.blogs.cnn.com.koa.pe http://mewkid.net/when-is-xuxlya3/
http://mewkid.net/when-is-xuxlya3/ – Buy Amoxicillin Amoxicillin tll.yhmg.reliablesources.blogs.cnn.com.tph.uq http://mewkid.net/when-is-xuxlya3/
Just article, We liked its style and content. I discovered this blog on Yahoo and also have now additional it to my personal bookmarks. I’ll be certain to visit once again quickly.
http://yourmatrixcashmachine.com
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/
Mr. Kurtz, you and your guest confused the issues: Ms. Jones did not "rip" the media, she objected to a COLUMNIST who wrote an OPINION PIECE that was harshly critical, and at a very inappropriate time. Yes, A reporter IS there to REPORT the news, not cheer in a partisan fashion, but that is NOT what Ms. Jones commented about.
Ms. Jones DOES have the right to expect that her country would not RIP her on the eve of competition. That writer has every right to his opinion, but he ought to exercise more judgment in when and how he expresses it. And perhaps it was actually misdirected: it is not Ms. Jones he was really criticizing, but the American public for their appetite for what gets reported about female athletes.
Bottom-line, you and your guest did your viewers a disservice by such a sleight-of-hand approach to the topic, obfuscating the purposes of reporters and op-ed writers. You owe Ms. Jones, and your viewers, an apology for misleading us and "piling on" to Ms. Jones.
Howard, Christine – are you familiar with track and field or athletics as they call it in London? Your comments today suggest you are not. The story of Lolo Jones didn’t start this year or last year. It started with her ascent to becoming the favorite for the 100 meter hurdles at the Beijing Olympics. She had the same looks then but she wasn’t the favorite based on her looks. In the heats of the Beijing Olympics she ran 12.43. That’s better than the new personal best of bronze medalist Kellie Wells. Sure she choked at Beijing, but it wouldn’t have been a choke if she hadn’t earned the status as favorite. Since those Olympics she set the American record in the indoor 60 meter hurdles at 7.72. Then she had back surgery, which made it a big challenge to make this year’s team. Times in events and surgery are facts. The article in the New York Times was opinion. Christine suggested the article by Jere Longman was in line with “American” media’s role of reporting on performance rather than cheerleading. How is an article titled “For Lolo Jones, Everything Is Image” and language that says “Essentially, Jones has decided she will be whatever anyone wants her to be — vixen, virgin, victim — to draw attention to herself and the many products she endorses” reporting on performance? Shame on you Jere for writing the article. Shame on you Christine for saying American media are better than those in the rest of the world but let a colleague pass an opinion piece off as fact based reporting. And shame on you Howard for not challenging Christine.
If people want to see the best athletes, they watch the men, not the women. So sex appeal is used to sell women's athletics. However, many women athletes are not that attractive. A substantial number are amazons. So, whenever a relatively attractive female athlete comes on the scene, she gets hyped. Then, however, unattractive women resent her. Animosity is the result.