ArthurRE: Whats the speed of Dark ?
Well, the Speed of Dark is limited because it can´t break through the Silence Barrier.
ArthurRE: Whats the speed of Dark ?
Well, the Speed of Dark is limited because it can´t break through the Silence Barrier.
ArthurRE: Does the Media run the world ?
The pilots said it made no difference, while Blair stated it was having a significant impact on Slobodans ability to wage ethnic war
on Kosovars… he he he who to believe??… politicians or the guys in the planes flying over Kosovo?
…they already knew the atrocity stories as told by the Kosovars weren´t all too reliable either. But that is a bit the problem with the BBC docus: they only ask authorities, and very little ´from the ground´.
I agree it is too late to influence public opinion at the
time, but finding out a more rounded picture of what was
happening even months or years later reminds you not to take
everything at face value.
People forget the criticism about an old war when the new one erupts, and actually don´t want to know the facts anyway. Ironically, the only war to be ever properly reported on a what-happened-today-but-we-can´t-seem-to-find-a-bigger-picture-fitting-with-reality was the Vietnam War. Despite the absolute pro-US reporting (no wonder of course, it was the only accessible side for the media), the criticism coming out of those reports on how the war was ran was misunderstood as an anti-US bias, and indeed caused the US population to become weary of their government´s behaviour and comments (Watergate a few years later didn´t help either). But did it matter in the long run? Not if you look at the popularity of the Reagan administration during his reign…
How often have we heard recently about events that happened
10-12 years ago… say in Kuwaite as being justification for
doing things now?
…even the untrue news-reports of old are used as justifications for current actions. The Patriot is still a combat-proven success…
It is no longer really “news” any more but as it is not
restricted by deadlines andthere is plenty of time to get
the right footage together and if done correctly looking at
the subject in more than one dimension then it is far better
than the drivel we call news now.
Unfortunately, the pace in which information is expected to be filtered through the reporting, editorial and publishing phases is so high nowadays (both because of competition and because of public demand) gives little room for expanded, detached, objective journalism. The drivel is likely to worsen…
You mean like “Top Gun” and especially “JAG”?
No, i mean the documentaries. Life aboard a submarine, life aboard a USN carrier (without notion of the half a dozen suicides on average during a cruise), training with the Seals, the Rangers rescuing the Panamese population from the hands of the evil Noriega, the indestructability of an Abrams tank, the crime-solving qualities of the FBI… want me to go on?
It is amusing you mention that. The sailing of the sub is
actually sponsored by a Russian company… as was the refit.
The sailors were eating better than they had at sea for
quite some time for that reason.
On-shore Russian navy food used to be horrible during the mid-1990s. I ate at a naval officers mess in Kaliningrad in 1996 which ´went public´ to get some more funding to cater for food for the personell (there are reports of starved sailors, but i doubt those considering the general Russian resiliance). I have eaten better…
ArthurRE: Does the Media run the world ?
The pilots said it made no difference, while Blair stated it was having a significant impact on Slobodans ability to wage ethnic war
on Kosovars… he he he who to believe??… politicians or the guys in the planes flying over Kosovo?
…they already knew the atrocity stories as told by the Kosovars weren´t all too reliable either. But that is a bit the problem with the BBC docus: they only ask authorities, and very little ´from the ground´.
I agree it is too late to influence public opinion at the
time, but finding out a more rounded picture of what was
happening even months or years later reminds you not to take
everything at face value.
People forget the criticism about an old war when the new one erupts, and actually don´t want to know the facts anyway. Ironically, the only war to be ever properly reported on a what-happened-today-but-we-can´t-seem-to-find-a-bigger-picture-fitting-with-reality was the Vietnam War. Despite the absolute pro-US reporting (no wonder of course, it was the only accessible side for the media), the criticism coming out of those reports on how the war was ran was misunderstood as an anti-US bias, and indeed caused the US population to become weary of their government´s behaviour and comments (Watergate a few years later didn´t help either). But did it matter in the long run? Not if you look at the popularity of the Reagan administration during his reign…
How often have we heard recently about events that happened
10-12 years ago… say in Kuwaite as being justification for
doing things now?
…even the untrue news-reports of old are used as justifications for current actions. The Patriot is still a combat-proven success…
It is no longer really “news” any more but as it is not
restricted by deadlines andthere is plenty of time to get
the right footage together and if done correctly looking at
the subject in more than one dimension then it is far better
than the drivel we call news now.
Unfortunately, the pace in which information is expected to be filtered through the reporting, editorial and publishing phases is so high nowadays (both because of competition and because of public demand) gives little room for expanded, detached, objective journalism. The drivel is likely to worsen…
You mean like “Top Gun” and especially “JAG”?
No, i mean the documentaries. Life aboard a submarine, life aboard a USN carrier (without notion of the half a dozen suicides on average during a cruise), training with the Seals, the Rangers rescuing the Panamese population from the hands of the evil Noriega, the indestructability of an Abrams tank, the crime-solving qualities of the FBI… want me to go on?
It is amusing you mention that. The sailing of the sub is
actually sponsored by a Russian company… as was the refit.
The sailors were eating better than they had at sea for
quite some time for that reason.
On-shore Russian navy food used to be horrible during the mid-1990s. I ate at a naval officers mess in Kaliningrad in 1996 which ´went public´ to get some more funding to cater for food for the personell (there are reports of starved sailors, but i doubt those considering the general Russian resiliance). I have eaten better…
ArthurRE: Help! Avatar doesn’t work!
It might not work because you´ve put it on a Geocities server. Those sometimes don´t like it if you link to an image on that – but you won´t know when you´re putting your avatar in your profile as the image is likely to be in your cache anyway.
ArthurRE: Help! Avatar doesn’t work!
It might not work because you´ve put it on a Geocities server. Those sometimes don´t like it if you link to an image on that – but you won´t know when you´re putting your avatar in your profile as the image is likely to be in your cache anyway.
ArthurRE: Hendon B-17
Roger,
That would be one of the best, if not the best, indoors-museum pic i´ve ever seen!
ArthurRE: The
Keltic,
I stand corrected.
ArthurRE: The
Keltic,
I stand corrected.
ArthurRE: Does the Media run the world ?
Garry,
The BBC has produced some excellent docos on various events that (when they were screened) were still reasonably curent and fresh in the mind.
While you´re right that the BBC occasionally is quite fast with it´s docu´s (they did an excellent job in coming up with a great doc on 9/11 and the War on Terror in a matter of months, almost on the same level as the absolutely brilliant ´The end of Yugoslavia´ docu-series), but a documentary is almost by definition too late to influence public opinion and hence influence political decision-making. This is a sad thing, especially in a time when people rely on TV for their information about the rest of the world more than anything else. While television is a good medium to bring news around the world in a fast, superficious yet confronting way, it is extremely poor in providing insight. For the latter, written articles are still much faster (because they are easier to produce: you don´t need to dig for footage, no video editing, a phonecall will often do in stead of bringing in a camera team, etc) but the impact is far, far less.
Hehehehe… the number of different answers you can get to the same question even by asking the pilots vs the generals in the same AF is amusing…
The tough part of the job is to make such contradictory statements into a cohesive article/documentary/… But it´s fun indeed!
In comparison the Discovery docos on military weapons have been US flag waving affairs that ignore most foreign developments, though a recent doco on Russian submariners that took cameras aboard an Akula class (ie TYPHOON class) submarine patrol was very enlightening and for a change unbiased.
Quite a few of those, especially the non-historical ones, come right out of the US DoD public-relations fund. Those are the Discovery equivalent of cheap quiz shows: they cost very little, yet the bulk of the ignorant audiences love it… Personally, i don´t think such documentaries deserve to be called ´reports´ as they lack all sorts of criticism or even reflection. That would be pissing in your own beer.
I haven´t seen the Akula-docu (Discovery made me somewhat allergic for all sorts of sea stuff after airing Shark Week twice a month), but i can assure you that such a docu isn´t likely to be paid by the Russian taxpayer – hence, a more reflective view by the reporters is to be expected.
ArthurRE: Does the Media run the world ?
Garry,
The BBC has produced some excellent docos on various events that (when they were screened) were still reasonably curent and fresh in the mind.
While you´re right that the BBC occasionally is quite fast with it´s docu´s (they did an excellent job in coming up with a great doc on 9/11 and the War on Terror in a matter of months, almost on the same level as the absolutely brilliant ´The end of Yugoslavia´ docu-series), but a documentary is almost by definition too late to influence public opinion and hence influence political decision-making. This is a sad thing, especially in a time when people rely on TV for their information about the rest of the world more than anything else. While television is a good medium to bring news around the world in a fast, superficious yet confronting way, it is extremely poor in providing insight. For the latter, written articles are still much faster (because they are easier to produce: you don´t need to dig for footage, no video editing, a phonecall will often do in stead of bringing in a camera team, etc) but the impact is far, far less.
Hehehehe… the number of different answers you can get to the same question even by asking the pilots vs the generals in the same AF is amusing…
The tough part of the job is to make such contradictory statements into a cohesive article/documentary/… But it´s fun indeed!
In comparison the Discovery docos on military weapons have been US flag waving affairs that ignore most foreign developments, though a recent doco on Russian submariners that took cameras aboard an Akula class (ie TYPHOON class) submarine patrol was very enlightening and for a change unbiased.
Quite a few of those, especially the non-historical ones, come right out of the US DoD public-relations fund. Those are the Discovery equivalent of cheap quiz shows: they cost very little, yet the bulk of the ignorant audiences love it… Personally, i don´t think such documentaries deserve to be called ´reports´ as they lack all sorts of criticism or even reflection. That would be pissing in your own beer.
I haven´t seen the Akula-docu (Discovery made me somewhat allergic for all sorts of sea stuff after airing Shark Week twice a month), but i can assure you that such a docu isn´t likely to be paid by the Russian taxpayer – hence, a more reflective view by the reporters is to be expected.
ArthurRE: What was the greatest thing before sliced bread ?
A knife to slice bread yourself? I never really cared for unsliced bread actually, because by using a knife (or one of those electrical one-slice at one time home-slicers) gives you full control on the thickness of the slice.
A more interestign question is what comes next on the evolution of consumer goods?
Pre-salted eggs?
Pre-molten marshmallows?
ArthurRE: What was the greatest thing before sliced bread ?
A knife to slice bread yourself? I never really cared for unsliced bread actually, because by using a knife (or one of those electrical one-slice at one time home-slicers) gives you full control on the thickness of the slice.
A more interestign question is what comes next on the evolution of consumer goods?
Pre-salted eggs?
Pre-molten marshmallows?
ArthurRE: The
It´s not unknown that one of the main business on the rock,
is ilegal fuel traffic and that hundreds of “dustbins” come
to Gibraltar either to leave fuel or refuel. So appart from
uncontrolled cheap traffic (thats why they use unsafe and
old ships, in order to keep fuel´s price low), it´s a big
petrol station. What this bring it that, being Gibraltar a
keypoint in the tankers traffic, it seems that´s the only
place for old tankers to refuel in the route from Northern
Europe to Asia or others.
There is another port on the Western end of the Med doing exactly (and i mean exactly the same’)… Ceuta.
ArthurRE: The
It´s not unknown that one of the main business on the rock,
is ilegal fuel traffic and that hundreds of “dustbins” come
to Gibraltar either to leave fuel or refuel. So appart from
uncontrolled cheap traffic (thats why they use unsafe and
old ships, in order to keep fuel´s price low), it´s a big
petrol station. What this bring it that, being Gibraltar a
keypoint in the tankers traffic, it seems that´s the only
place for old tankers to refuel in the route from Northern
Europe to Asia or others.
There is another port on the Western end of the Med doing exactly (and i mean exactly the same’)… Ceuta.
Sign In
