Ok, that's actually really useful to know. Can you give me a couple of examples? They may be useful next time I go off on one, uh, I mean discuss this calmly and rationally. Thanks.
I'm slightly dissapointed not one of the gutter press rose to the obvious poking with the headline "Get your face out for Jack the lad". Or something.
It would be nice* if instead of either laughing or shouting there was actual communication -- if something is not understood why not ask? Why not volunteer the information? Speculation and assumptions of worse-cases do not build understanding and trust. We don't have to assimilate, but we might learn something.
* Bewary of sentences that start like this; they are almost always trite nonsensical ramblings, generally brought on by an as yet unrecognised desire for a caffinated beverage and a "chit chat"
Having not seen the programme I'm not sure of context, but I've also read that the interviewee wasn't well informed on what she was being offended about, possibly the same one that I heard on the radio last night ''Hajib Action'' or something like that
( ... )
This wasn't a rant about the whole issue of facial concealment, although I may well post one soon. Rather, it was about the approach in this instance. The question of whether people should be encouraged to show their faces to give additional information is a much more complex one
( ... )
Appreciate your first, but it gave me a chance to have what passes for a rant about it without writing a post myself ;)
And as to the other, I've just been listening to a discussion on R4 about Womans hour and their editorial decisions. I've also just read Andrew Marr on the topic as well. Television News, and indeed print media, need sensation to attract viewers. It's not their job to be sensitive to cultural issues :(
Comments 8
It's not that they didn't have religion - they just didn't separate it off into a discreet thought category.
IOW, I agree with you.
Reply
Reply
Reply
It would be nice* if instead of either laughing or shouting there was actual communication -- if something is not understood why not ask? Why not volunteer the information? Speculation and assumptions of worse-cases do not build understanding and trust. We don't have to assimilate, but we might learn something.
* Bewary of sentences that start like this; they are almost always trite nonsensical ramblings, generally brought on by an as yet unrecognised desire for a caffinated beverage and a "chit chat"
Reply
Reply
Perceptibly.
All the time.
/fear
Reply
Reply
And as to the other, I've just been listening to a discussion on R4 about Womans hour and their editorial decisions. I've also just read Andrew Marr on the topic as well. Television News, and indeed print media, need sensation to attract viewers. It's not their job to be sensitive to cultural issues :(
Reply
Leave a comment