the news,
is directed at stupid,
people to frighten and confuse them,
while making them feel,
like theyre somehow informed,
about what goes on in the world.

 

No, these are the same story. Kimiko had it right - headline writers are employed by the individual newspapers (or websites), and they only provide headlines, for stories someone else wrote. The same story will have different headlines in different places, spun according to the biases of the headline writer or his editor. The examples given here are not unusual. I travel a lot, and read the same story in different papers. I see this a lot.

The joke you see on this from conservatives is that when armeggedon comes, the New York Times will report it with a headline that reads, "World ends - Women and Minorities Hardest Hit"

 

So ........ can I assume you watch a lot of news?

No they are not. They weren't the same story yesterday. And there is a completely different story today on the exact same link. Check them out yourself. It is very significant because it exposes this source's agenda which is to twist the news to a preconceived purpose. That's not news its propaganda.

This is not necessarily true. Headlines are often written by a variety of people which might include the actual reporter, an editor or editorial staff, or as you say someone actually assigned to write just headlines. But what you're saying has enough truth that I won't quibble with it. As long as you and everyone else understands there is kind of a science that goes into headline writing and there are ethical guidelines that are SUPPOSED to apply.

No, now this is where you get off base. Its not normally a case of some headline writer or editor standing there writing headlines according to their own personal bias. That just ain't so in the very vast majority of cases. They are standing there writing headlines according to what they see as the most important element, a summary in as few words as possible, and what they believe are important to their readers. That does lead to a lot of room for variations but headlines are not some personal political conspiracy.

The examples given here are very unusual in my experience if for no other reason then they contradict themselves within the same source. (Indidentally, the headlines you're reading in tenguys OP were not the headlines I saw when I clicked on the links).

Granted for the reasons I explained above. But how many times do you pick up a paper and read two headlines that directly contradict each other. I don't remember when's the last time I saw that and I also read a lot of different newspapers everyday and spend a lot of time checking at least half a dozen internet news sources every day.

That figures for conservatives but the biggest joke they ever played on the American public is inventing and maintaining the myth of the Liberal Press, which doesn't exist now and never did.

By the way, the New York Times is actually an excellent publication and the only reason people think otherwise is because they have broken so many accurate stories exposing things conservatives don't like to read in the paper. Its the old "liberal press" trick again to try and discredit the source because they've been caught doing something wrong.

 

I don't know what the page had been altered to when you looked at it; but what it's been altered to NOW, is a report which falls more into line with the other report on the same speech. That suggests to me that the editor, or whoever is in overall charge, spotted the difference in tones and had them altered - which is kind of what he should be doing.

 

You guys still aren't getting it.

Yesterday I clicked on the links and got these two headlines.

Stocks jump after Bernanke says recession may end

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...4/Wall.Street/

When I click on the second link I get:

Bernanke says recession to linger


http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...-FED-BERNANKE/

Today I click on the links and get these two headlines.

Stocks jump after Bernanke says recession may end



Bernanke confident can keep U.S. inflation at bay



That's not a different headline. Its an entirely different story. I'm not completely paranoid but its akin to the constant re-writing of history that was part of the book 1984.

See its not really news. Its a message comcast is trying to portray. Its not the news and its not the headlines. Its a propaganda facroty.

 

Comcast did not write the stories, one was from AP the other from Rueters, I linked them through Comcast because that is where I first read them. But, you are right they are two completely different articles on the same topic, with two different emphasis.

Which was my point. It illustrates that ones preconceptions can and will alter ones take on almost anything.

 

Bullshit tenguy check your own source again. They are THREE completely different articles. Its not AP and its not Reuters pulling the strings here its COMCAST.

If you really want to look at what might be confusing about the news, use news sources, not some propaganda factory.

 

Sorry Stumbles but you are wrong, they are from AP and Reuters, they were on their sites, linked by Comcast.

Why do you argue? When it is clearly evident that Comcast doesn't have a news agency, it is completely pointless.

 

Did you bother to check your own source tenguy? The story on the second link is not the same story that was there yesterday.

COMCAST can pick up any story they want from anywhere as long as it suits their preconceived agenda. The only real problem here is you're trying to make some kind of case using a bullshit source

 

God damn you are cantankerous. No one claimed any such thing, I comment on the FACT that two news agencies spin a story in totally different directions and you come up with this.

Get a life. Try to stay on topic, it is another symptom of your affliction.

 

I'm directly on topic tenguy. Did you check your own source?

I read both stories yesterday and did not find what you put in the headline in the second story. I went back to double check last night but that story is gone and there is a different story and a different headline it its place.

Comcast is simply cherry picking different stories to further their on agenda. They are also writing the headlines your talking about.

Let's try it this way.

You go back to the stories you posted and put the exact quotes you're talking about right here.

 

I've seen headlines that clearly misstated or even contradicted the story itself. Headline writers are not always big on reading comprehension, and I doubt they read very much past the lead paragraph.

 

That is certainly true, there are also a lot of folks in here who get their slant on the news from those headlines.

 

Please explain to me why Comcast posts articles from all sources on their homepage, they provide links to stories from many diverse sources, but they mainly use AP, USToday and Reuters. Just like MSN.com, Yahoo.com and most others do?

You are jousting with windmills.

 

Umm, yes. That was my point, which seems to have gone over your head by about a mile and a half.

 

Not uncommon at all.

 

Reuters headline: Bernanke says recession to linger.

The Reuters story, at least, came complete with a headline: Comcast didn't write that one. I can't find the AP story on the AP's own website.

In both cases, the actual words spoken by Bernanke state that he believes the recession could be over by the end of this year. Naturally, in the real world, anything that could happen this year, might not - but newspapers don't like that sort of thing. They're black and white in more senses than one. So the story is either "Recession to end this year" or "Recession to continue until '10" depending how you want to report it.

 

That link was attributed to AP by Comcast. If you have their homepage and you click on the news button in the sub tool bar, you'll find both AP & Reuters listed. I usually start my news hour with a cruise through their links.

 

View attachment ​

 

Because they clearly have a preconceived agenda, and ideology that they are trying to sell to an unsuspecting public. And so they comb through several sources to find stories that support that agenda and write headlines accordingly.

Nope, I'm pointing out something important here. That comcast cannot be trusted.

Heyesey you have not made a point. The point is comcast is not presenting news. They are cherry picking articles that support their preconceived agenda. They are not reporting news they are selling an ideology.

That is exactly the point information appears and disappears and can't be retraced. There's a very good reason for that and it is that comcast is only interested in making specific impressions and then moving on to the next tidbit that supports their agenda.

They are clearly stockmarket oriented.

Which certianly explains why you are so woefully misinformed and can only spout conservative dogma. Try reading the real news sometime instead of propaganda.

And I knew you couldn't find the actual quotes tenguy which is proof positive comcast is not a reliable source of information.