tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37798047.post148047340967107912..comments2024-01-16T05:48:33.523-05:00Comments on Errata Security: "From Putin with Love" - a novel by the New York TimesDavid Maynorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09921229607193067441noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37798047.post-89491589130281755542016-12-31T12:22:55.614-05:002016-12-31T12:22:55.614-05:00This is a very good article. Unfortunately this is...This is a very good article. Unfortunately this is so common in American news (both print and broadcast) that people have become numb to it and just accept it at face value rather than seeking the truth. One point maybe not directly related to this article is the unhealthy infatuation with the "evil" Russia. This is truly an unhealthy attitude that is a relic of another era. Anyone taking a realistic view of the world today should understand that the most dangerous country in the world is the USA. Take a look at a world map of various countries military installations. We are all over the world including having Russia surrounded and sitting right at their front door! If the situation were reversed we would be apoplectic. But we feel that Russia has no right to become aggressive when we threaten them. How foolish. It is time to move on from the "evil" Russia narrative and start addressing the real threats we face such as the dangers of aggressive Islam, uncontrolled illegal immigration and a very aggressive China.Ips Prezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12399464312536245475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37798047.post-32913479088520182132016-12-28T06:01:03.396-05:002016-12-28T06:01:03.396-05:00Putin is still heavily involved in Russian politic...Putin is still heavily involved in Russian politics – in his new role of Prime Minister – doesn’t bode well. And neither does Medvedev’s remark that his policies will be "a direct continuation of that path which is being carried out by President Putin". On the other hand, the new President’s been making use of “liberal language” over the past few weeks. <br /><a href="http://mightyessays.com/" rel="nofollow">more info</a>Chris Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06429023109572879726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37798047.post-74160377310187399982016-12-22T11:48:43.256-05:002016-12-22T11:48:43.256-05:00Your analysis of the nytimes' language is sadl...Your analysis of the nytimes' language is sadly fairly universal across their writing. For example, in mental health stories, every standard medication is referred to as "powerful" as in "a powerful anti-pyschotic". You have also analyzed previous hacking stories where the language is unclear and misleading. Typically, when I read a nytimes story, it comes across as well-structured and authoritative. However, I find it fairly common that when I ask an expert about a story in his/her field that the expert takes issue with the framing and tone of the story. Still for general news, I haven't found anything much better.<br /><br />That said, I think some of your inferrences are the same kind of speculative overreach that you accuse the nytimes of. Perhaps they are sympathetic to a particular agenda but the larger phenomenon is driven more by stirring up reading interest with overly strong language and conclusions than about grasping for scraps to put together for a specific agenda. Certainly the anonymous government sources have an agenda, but I think it has always been the case that news stories about politics and Washington are based on anonymous government sources. It would be ridiculous for the president to investigate all of them. Also, while Greenwald might have a Russian/Republican bias, he clearly has a bias for leakers/whistleblowers and would like to push back against the characterization of WikiLeaks as a tool of the Russian government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com