Newspapers Verses Blogs.

naisho said:
Did you get that? Basically to me, if statistics are done properly, especially thorough depending on the circumstances of the debate/subject, you have very good information regarding the outcome of people's opinions on something, or in a rhetorical sense, you could understand what is right or wrong in the sense of numbers....The way I see it, the correct numbers never lie, it's the words that make it do should the person report them erroneously.
Click to expand...

that makes perfect sense and is exactly what i learned in my statistics course last semester. thanks for the explanation!
 
lsfoster said:
It's interesting, because this is exactly why I don't like statistics. The numbers might not lie, but numbers by themselves have no meaning. If you just put: 50. It doesn't mean anything. Even: 50%. Of what? Take the first statement, 50% of californians polled disapproved..... It's technically true. It doesn't say "50% of californians disapproved..." It says that 50% of the ones polled. It just doesn't tell you who those are.

The numbers might not be able to lie, but they are also completely unable to present their "truths" without words, and the words are too easy to manipulate.
Click to expand...

this is true as well. as my statistics professor said, the only thing you can do when reading a survey is to interpret the methodology, numbers and results as best you can before arriving at your own conclusion.
 
dreama said:
Of course it's the bloggers opion. Same as it's the Journalists opion. That doesn't mean it isn't true. Sometimes bloggers will write from personal experience in which case what they say generally carries more weight.
Click to expand...

the reason why editor's opinion carries much more weight over blogger is because their opinions are intellectually structured and written. and in editor's business - he is exposed to far more matter than blogger. Blogger's opinion is more of rambling and very one-sided. But of course.. what issues are we talking about? I'm sure dreama prefers to read newspapers on some current events and blogs on personal issue like abortion & euthanasia.

am i right, dreama?
 
naisho said:
The way I see it, the correct numbers never lie, it's the words that make it do should the person report them erroneously.
Click to expand...

numbers do not lie but people lie. the only way to know the truth is to see the raw data. problem is - you most likely cannot have access to raw data nor have any resource to obtain the raw data yourself.
 
Jiro said:
numbers do not lie but people lie. the only way to know the truth is to see the raw data. problem is - you most likely cannot have access to raw data nor have any resource to obtain the raw data yourself.
Click to expand...

And not everyone knows how to interpt the raw data. I certainly don't. I just find stats a useful guide but I would never take them as gospel.
 
It depends on what's on the blogs.

A well-discussed blog will include reference to sources that make it reliable. It's like a well-written research paper in college.
 
VamPyroX said:
It depends on what's on the blogs.

A well-discussed blog will include reference to sources that make it reliable. It's like a well-written research paper in college.
Click to expand...

Nods. Too bad not all blogs are like that.
 
Aghori said:
Newspaper ... so yesterday!

Blogs... come with comments.
Click to expand...

You may be right since this is the internet age but however, Newspaper are still a viable source. As for comments, There's editorials on the newspaper too. :)
 
Jolie77 said:
You may be right since this is the internet age but however, Newspaper are still a viable source. As for comments, There's editorials on the newspaper too. :)
Click to expand...

Also, don't forget, if reading the newspaper online, there's the comments. :)
 
PuyoPiyo said:
Also, don't forget, if reading the newspaper online, there's the comments. :)
Click to expand...

Aha, Yes that too.

There are some newspaper companies online that will require people to register to post their comments.
 
newspapers will always have a place even in the internet age. if one wants to keep up with current events, there is no other way to do so besides reading a print or online newspaper. blogs may have commentaries about current events, but they are based on opinion -- not fact.
 
Aghori said:
Newspaper ... so yesterday!

Blogs... come with comments.
Click to expand...

newspaper are available online. and so are the writers. you can email writers to exchange your opinion and such. but blog.... my god.... can you believe the comments? it's full of flaming, "zing joke", and cheap shots. But I admit that it was funny :cool2:
 
I work with newspapers for a living. I can tell you without hesitation that more than often that the stories are misleading, inaccurate and much more than one can possibly imagine.

It's only the job of the reporter/journalist to report but they don't always get the complete story, just pieces of it. So when you want to talk about credibility when it comes to newspapers, my advice is to not take everything at face's value. Read the article, then do the research and ask around, this way, you will be able to get a better idea of what actually happened.

In general, bloggers can write whatever they want to. So yes, one would be right to assume that the story may be more than often to be misleading and not the truth. But there are bloggers with a reputation enough to be trusted by a large number of readers. The wonderful thing about the blogosphere is that anybody can speak their minds and offer different perspectives on anything they wish to. We can learn much more from each other this way.

Just saying that both newspapers and blogs aren't without its flaws. Normally, I read newspapers to get the latest stories. But sometimes I do read bloggers if they have a good reptuation and sometimes they have great commentaries to offer.

We can learn a lot from both.
 
Banjo said:
I work with newspapers for a living. I can tell you without hesitation that more than often that the stories are misleading, inaccurate and much more than one can possibly imagine.
Click to expand...

that's why there's a big difference between New York Times and Bergen Record. but yes - with reputable newspaper... and reputable blogger on same issue... it's a good balance.
 
Jiro said:
that's why there's a big difference between New York Times and Bergen Record. but yes - with reputable newspaper... and reputable blogger on same issue... it's a good balance.
Click to expand...

Or the difference between CNN and Fox news even if they aren't newspapers.
 
Banjo said:
Normally, I read newspapers to get the latest stories. But sometimes I do read bloggers if they have a good reptuation and sometimes they have great commentaries to offer.

We can learn a lot from both.
Click to expand...

See, I think this is what it really comes down to. Bloggers offer commentaries. They have to get the news somewhere to begin with, and that usually means a newspaper or news show of some kind. The thing is, newspapers are supposed to present the news impartially (and obviously some of them don't, but they're still supposed to be held to that standard). If all bloggers did was read the newspaper to you, then they wouldn't have much of a following. By their nature they have to have an agenda. I'm not saying that's always a bad thing. I mean, if someone has a blog devoted solely to pointing out all the crap that Fox news says, then go them!

The thing is, when I'm reading an editorial in the paper, I know it's an editorial, and it's understood that it's one person's opinion. I know a lot of friends who will take everything in a blog as fact, even though they rarely cite their sources or methods, and generally have really poor and fallacious arguments. Usually it's because that friend agrees with the point of the blog, and uses it to "back up" their view, since someone else feels the same way they do.

It just seems kind of silly. I mean, I could start a blog, and write this,

"I need to inform the general public that CHEERIOS CAN KILL YOU!!! It's true, I read a study saying that eating a bowl of cheerios is now considered as dangerous as smoking a cigarette. Researchers are currently investigating this baffling discovery, but for now, DON'T EAT CHEERIOS!"

I know plenty of people who would use the same kind of argument from a blog to support their point. Of course, not about cheerios, but that's just an example to show how ridiculous this issue can get. When it's a serious issue, and people want to prove that they're right, they'll use something presented like that as fact, even though there is absolutely none in there.

:dunno:
 
Yes, I second that, Banjo.

It depend on good or bad blogs and newspapers...

Example: I read a reliable newspaper and blog about the same case... but the blogger wrote more sense than newspaper over that same case... some newspaper reporter wrote more sense than blogger.. It really depend on situation what kind of view either it's sense or not.

I really haven't anything to say against blog and newspaper, like what Banjo said that we can learn alot from both.
 
Babyblue said:
I truly don't trust either.
They do tell a story and the news. Sometimes they are not accurate or they are exaggerated,
But it is not entirely false.

Media is out to get paid.
Click to expand...

We must look for the bias in everything we read, and always view it with a critical eye. However, this is much more necessary when reading a blog than when reading a newspaper. Newpapers will twist in order to make a story more interesting to the public (e.g. to sell papers), but bloggers will quite often post total innacuracies in order to promote their personal agenda.
 
Back
Top