Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Today serious journalism died

  1. Aug 2, 2006 #1
    This is the front-page headline of the New York Times, with the front-page photo:


  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 2, 2006 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I'm just curious as to how one can concludes that serious journalism died based on the article.

    From my perspective, the NY Times is pointing out a situation in Washington that generally goes unnoticed by the public - that of access by lobbyists and influence peddlers to Senators whose actions have a profound impact on the course of the nation.

    That seems pretty serious, even if done somewhat tongue in cheek.

    :rolleyes: :yuck: So how do lobbyists work the Senate now?
  4. Aug 2, 2006 #3
    The very next sentence:

  5. Aug 2, 2006 #4
    As I read it, the article didn't focus on lobbyists and corruption very much - it was mostly a curiosity article with no merit. I couldn't agree more strongly that lobbyists need much more scrutiny in the media.

  6. Aug 2, 2006 #5
    This is actually quite disgustingly elitist:

    What is this, the 1830's? :grumpy:
  7. Aug 2, 2006 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    it reminds me of the old testament account of king saul, who was apparently king because he was the tallest guy around.

    maybe the dems should have recruited ken "too tall" galbraith as a candidate before it was too late.

    but i also took a serious point from the article abut how out of touch those guys are. the poor working man and woman paid for the secluded elevator where the enron lobbyist argued for more tax breaks.
  8. Aug 2, 2006 #7


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    for people who think the ny times is a liberal tool and wonder how it got tht way, i recall when it was very serious and very conservative organ.

    that was in 1968, just before mayor daly's thugs in police uniforms beat the reporters over their heads in chicago at the democratic convention.

    the editorial tone changed overnight. apparently nothing radicalizes faster than a billy club to the skull.
  9. Aug 2, 2006 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I should like to point out that 'conservative' and 'politically conservative' are currently very different notions. The neocon policy and agenda could accurately be described as radical.

    As a consequence, its quite plausible that conservatives (institutions and individuals alike) will find themselves at odds with the Bush administration and policies.

    I'm sure that any competent lobbying firm will hire attractive young men and women to cater to the tastes of all of the senators.
  10. Aug 2, 2006 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This is funny! Here's the real problem

    I've mentioned this a few times now: The elevator operators play an important role in the subtleties of politics. I once heard this from a senator on Meet The Press... not sure who any more, but he joked and laughed about how every now and again a Jr. Senator will move to get rid of the operators, but soon they learn the real purpose of these go-between button pushers, and the issue is dropped.
  11. Aug 2, 2006 #10
    How's this recent NYT article for serious journalism?

    The Allure of the Tool Belt

    I think Althouse said it best:

    Sweet, beautiful real estate.
  12. Aug 2, 2006 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Interesting comment for the NYT. Is it even true? I know senators tend to have pretty hair (some consultants feel you can't run without it), and it could be that the "archetype" (bad term; somatype is more accurate) is also a consultant constraint. It is true, contra all liberal wishes, that Americans tend to treat tall people with more respect than short people. And "tall aristos / short peasants" was something of a stereotype in England, but not in France, where the noblesse were short. The English stereotype might have come out of the Viking invasions of England in the later first millenium.
  13. Aug 2, 2006 #12
    English men are as tall as there US counterparts, I'm not sure why but US women are slightly taller, perhaps they need to make the point that the US is the finest melting pot in the world and look their male counterpoints in the eye whilst they are saying it?:smile:

    Personally I think the general public should use the stairs, that way they'll outlive there senatorial counterparts by being more fit, it's democratic evolution in progress :smile:
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook