HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Liberal Bias Example
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 00:49:17 GMT

dsvoss@isr.harvard.edu (Steve Voss) writes:

>Some of you seem particularly upset with recent stories knocking Bush's
>newly-announced tax plan.  A few newspapers have printed stories saying
>that economists consider Bush's plan unlikely to succeed, and the general
>feeling seems to be that this conclusion is a product of the reporters
>contacting liberal economists.  
[...]
>Covering almost any story of this sort is difficult, because the conclusion
>reached by a "poll of the experts" story is almost always influenced by
>the choice of experts.  A reporter can try to balance people across
>ideological labels, but not every conservative will like Bush's plan
>and not every liberal will oppose it -- so even a "balanced" story in
>this way might be imbalanced in another.  

>I would be interested to hear
>what people attacking these stories would propose in their place.  Don't
>try to cover "expert" reaction at all (which probably means leaving voters
>with nothing to go by in evaluating these plans except for political
>propaganda)?  Arbitrarily make sure you have an even balance of supporters
>and opponents?  (Then how does the voter gauge whether the plan is good
>or not?)  I know that when I used to write "poll of the experts" stories,
>my selection of the experts was determined by which experts were in their
>offices when I had to write the story.  But then, maybe that creates a
>liberal bias -- you know, liberals hang out more in their offices or
>something like that.

It would be very easy to get the facts out and at the same time let us
know where the facts are from.  Saying, "experts agree..." is just a
sham.  Why not tell us which experts and let us make up our own minds
about the credibilty of the expert.  It wouldn't be very hard, with an
obviously controversial issue (like a campaign) to get an expert opinion
from both camps and identify the individuals.  There is also no harm in
saying that "out of these 10 experts that I contacted, 7 of them thought
this plan was a pig..."  Having to identify these experts would very
quickly bring some accountability into the media.  

One of my personal favorite news techniques is where the reporter
finishes a story with, "of course critics would say that ..."  Where the
reporter just inserts his opinion of what he believes a critic would
most likely say.  Is there a more obvious way to insert some personal
bias into a story?

-- 

Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism.d
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Creationist presence in this newsgroup
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Distribution: alt
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:19:06 GMT

sleator@CS.CMU.EDU (Daniel Sleator) writes:

>To deny evolution is to deny all the evidence of paleontology, and
>manifold patterns of structure and function in biology.  In fact
>denying evolution requires repudiating rational thought and the entire
>framework of science itself.  There's really no point in my arguing
>about the fact of evolution.

>Somebody who accepts creationism in favor of evolution might as well
>go on believing that Uri Geller can bend spoons with his mind or that
>Elvis materializes from time to time.  The level of critical thought
>indicated is the same: zero.

>It's interesting to note:

> Of the last 130 posts (all that I have access to) in alt.news-media,
> Chip Switzer made 37.  That's 28% of all posts in this newsgroup.

> Of the last 162 posts (all that I have access to) in alt.activism.d,
> Chip Switzer made 43.  That's 27% of all posts in this newsgroup.

>A single person, who is an avowed creationist, is dominating the
>traffic on these groups.  It's a shame.

>                             D. Sleator

It should be noted that this man is a tenured university professor.
He seems to be espousing the same type of rights the liberals were
preaching while I was an undergrad...  Freedom of speech, unless of 
course you disagree with me, then I will shout you down and try to
run you off the campus.  Would anybody like to discuss hypocrisy?


Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502

Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism,alt.activism.d
From: shou@quads.uchicago.edu (roger colin shouse)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Reply-To: shou@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:56:11 GMT

In article <kybn2rl.adamsr@netcom.com> adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams) writes:
>Thus spake farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell): 
>
>>Nor do they clamor for legalized prostitution. They feel it degrades women.
>>But they can't have it both ways. 
>>
>	Speak for yourself. I'm pro-choice and I'm VERY much in favor of
>legalized prostitution. It isn't a question of legalized prostitution
>degrading women - it's a question of governmental regulation of a woman's
>body. I fail to see how legalizing an act would make it more degrading to a
>woman than it is if it is a crime! And CERTAINLY legalization would PROTECT
>women from many of the negative aspects of prostitution - look at Nevada or
>much of Europe in comparison to the treatment of prostitutes in American
>cities!
>
>	Legalization of prostitution may not be a universally held objective
>of pro choice individuals, but it IS very much in keeping with the
>pro-choice position that a woman must be permitted to make decisions which
>concern her own body.
>

Does this right also apply to people under the age of 18?  If so, can we
not make the same kind of argument regarding sexual realtions between minors
and adults?  In other words, in addition to allowing prostitution, fairness
dictates that we also repeal laws against statutory rape.    While we're at 
it, we ought to repeal laws against incest between consulting adults.  My 
point is that an activity ought not be considered a "right" just because
it is available and can arguably be said not to hurt anyone.  There is a
justifiable concern for the "social fabric."

>>When two people CHOOSE to have sex, they CHOOSE to accept the consequences
>>of their actions. (yes, there is such a thing as a pro-life liberal. Please 
>>send flames to the above address)	
>>
>	Then, since the current anti-abortion stance (read the Republican
>platform) is that abortion is wrong even to save the life of the woman - the
>"consequences" you speak of are death.
>
>	Do you also support execution of the male involved in such
>circumstances, or is it only the woman who is to "accept the consequences?"
>
Now of course, this is rediculous and incorrect.  I can make the same 
argument about the Dem's position supporting "choice" -- that it applies
even to women entering their final month of pregnancy.  And damnit, if
she wants an abortion at that point she's got a right to choose!

Actually, I don't think most Dems would support this, any more than most
Reps want to deny abortions to women in life threatening situations.  And
in any event (even though it has not a snowball's chance in hell of passing),
the so called "human life amendment" allows abortion when the mother's life
is threatened.


-- 
Roger Shouse
The University of Chicago 		Email: shou@midway.uchicago.edu

Xref: sparky alt.news-media:987 alt.activism.d:2878
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Creationist presence in this newsgroup
From: bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:09:14 -0500
Distribution: alt
Organization: Miami University Academic Computer Service"

In article <SLEATOR.92Aug25002325@SPADE.PC.CS.CMU.EDU>, sleator@CS.CMU.EDU (Daniel Sleator) writes:
> 
> Somebody who accepts creationism in favor of evolution might as well
> go on believing that Uri Geller can bend spoons with his mind or that
> Elvis materializes from time to time.  The level of critical thought
> indicated is the same: zero.

	There is a third possibility here:  That creation and evolution are not
necessarily conflicting ideas.  I have yet to see anything in science that says 
creationism, or spiritual beliefs cannot be true.  The only problem occurs when
religious beliefs insist that the earth is flat, while science insists it is
round.  Or when science claims that it can explain everything and leaves no
room for anythig else could be a reverse example.


> A single person, who is an avowed creationist, is dominating the
> traffic on these groups.  It's a shame.

	oh well, he didn't break any laws, did he?


> 
>                              D. Sleator


=======================================================================
Brian Harmon    	"Sometimes I think: and sometimes I am"   
Miami University			--Paul Valery
Oxford, Ohio 45056  	"I believe that man will not only endure, 
(513) 529-5417			he will prevail."
  					-- William Faulkner
--------------bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu--------------------------
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:1035 alt.activism:15497 alt.activism.d:2925
From: bblumenf@ems.cdc.com (Robert Blumenfeld)
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Date: 26 Aug 92 22:10:28 GMT
Reply-To: bblumenf@ems.cdc.com
Followup-To: alt.news-media
Distribution: na
Organization: Empros Systems International, a division of CDC

In article <kybn2rl.adamsr@netcom.com>, adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams) writes:
|> woman than it is if it is a crime! And CERTAINLY legalization would PROTECT
|> women from many of the negative aspects of prostitution - look at Nevada or
|> much of Europe in comparison to the treatment of prostitutes in American
|> cities!
|> 

Oh, jeez!  Did Nevada secede?

-- Bob
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d
From: dwolff@res-c4.Prime.COM (David Wolff)
Subject: re: Gardner on Evolution
Followup-To: talk.origins
Organization: Prime Computer, Inc.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:00:59 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.223154.1867@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>,
tcanham@kilroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Canham) writes:
>                                      
> This is the root of the issue.  A person who rules out supernaturalistic
> origins must settle for evolution, because there is no other conceivable
> naturalistic solution.  Even when evolution violates fundamental
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> naturalistic, verifiable laws such as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics 
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (i.e. closed systems tend to move toward disorder, or randomness, or 
> unusable forms of energy, depending on application), it still must be
> accepted because the only alternative is a supernaturalistic 
> explanantion, no matter its scope.  The profound transition from
> evolution to creation is not scientific, but _philosophical_.

Thank you for making your intellectual bankruptcy clear beyond
any possible misunderstanding.

The Earth is not a closed system.  It has a thermonuclear fusion only
a few light-minutes away constantly spewing energy onto one side, and it
radiates toward a blackbody absorber (the universe) on the other side.

Really, if you want to disguise your rampant fundie-ism, you should
make sure you never use this argument.

Followups to talk.origin... unless it's too hot for you there? :-)

David Wolff

dwolff@RES-C4.Prime.COM (works from most places)
dwolff%res-c4.prime.com@relay.cs.net (alternate)

Disclaimer:  Reflecting Prime policy is a non-goal of this posting.
FreeAdvert:  Esperanto, the international language *that works*:
             Call (800) 828-5944 for free info package (US or Canada)
WittyQuote:  Are we kinder and gentler yet?
Kibofodder:  tzo Kibo awt
From: adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 23:22:59 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: na

Thus spake pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek): 

>Will this National Health care program also be paying for face lifts, fanny
>tucks, liposuction, or Minoxidil?  Why should I have to buy these things
>for other people?
>
	I was refering to those implants performed for more than cosmetic
reasons (i.e., in cases of breast reconstruction, etc.). I have no problem
with strictly cosmetic procedures being exempt from National Health - but in
THAT case I fail to find the original argument - that the FDA ruling
unfairly restricted the poor - to be valid, since they are restricted from
other forms of cosmetic procedures as well.

	By the same logic, however, I also don't see any purpose in
National Health paying for "heroic measures" in the case of the terminally
ill - but I see a GREAT deal of value in their paying for hospice care in
such cases.

	Actually, in one sense I DO oppose the FDA ban on implants - and
that is in the sense that I oppose bans on ANYTHING an adult chooses to use.
I would FAR rather see the FDA simply require that the manufacturers of such
products label them honestly as to the relative risk factors (including a
statement as to the alternatives) and to require physicians to inform the
patients that there WAS a risk factor, and that safer alternatives existed.
But I would only support such a position if it became uniform - i.e.,
applied to all substances (including drugs, tobacco, alcohol, etc.). Right
now the FDA is depended upon by the population to remove from market any
product of a medical nature demonstrably harmful to the individual. Given
that restriction, I find no problem with the inclusion of the implant in
that group.


-- 
    rick.adams on GEnie   /|\        You are right from your side,        
     adamsr@netcom.com  /  |  \        And I am right from mine.          
    adamsr@irie.ais.org \ /|\ /  We're both just one too many mornings,   
   adamsr@norwich.bitnet  \|/  And a thousand miles behind. (c Bob Dylan) 
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:1062 alt.rush-limbaugh:4043
From: rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator)
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Creationists
Date: 28 Aug 92 10:03:49 GMT
Followup-To: alt.news-media
Distribution: usa
Organization: MAWL - Mudd Alums Without Lives

In article <19928@plains.NoDak.edu> jorgense@plains.NoDak.edu (Lee A. Jorgensen) writes:
>Even the school system, which (is supposed to) teach(es) fact, didn't accept
>Darwin's Theory until they lost a court case which 'forced' evolution into
>the school system.

Although your statement is literally true, the implication is that the
case you're referring to is the famous Scopes Monkey Trial.  This is
wrong.  John Scopes lost.  Evolution found its way into the classroom
via another case which made its way all the way to the Supreme Court.

Agitator
  #->

"A political deadend."                  Bruce Herschensohn for U.S. Senate!!!
    --Gore on the Vice Presidency when    Not the ten-year       //  The REAL
      asked about a Dukakis-Gore ticket   Congress insider      //   outsider
--------------- R E M E M B E R   B E I J I N G ------------\\ //------------
IBM PC - Who wants a politically correct computer?           \X/  Only AMIGA!
========================================== Bring Back the Caltech Cannon!! ==
Roderick Lee, HMC '91      "The Professional Agitator"      agitator@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Creationists
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 01:45:21 GMT

In article <19928@plains.NoDak.edu> jorgense@plains.NoDak.edu (Lee A. Jorgensen) writes:
> The only thing that the geologic record shows, is that the Earth has been
> here for awhile.  It does not prove nor disprove evolution.  Albeit, it
> (geologic record) cannot prove nor disprove creation.

Of COURSE it can't, because creationism can't be used to make predictions! When
you can say "evolution would predict that such-and-such is likely to be found,
while creationism would predict so-and-so" then creationism can be tested. You
simply see what gets dug up and see if it better fits the predictions of
creationism or evolution.

In the absence of any such test, it's a pointless theory.

I mean, I can claim that the earth was created on the 23rd of July, 1960, along
with every person in it and every thing, all documents, all history, and so on.
It's sure a simple theory: the whole world is just a simulation created for my
education and amusement. But it can't be used to make predictions, so it's worse
than wrong: it's *useless*.

Creationism is *worse* than wrong, it's useless.

> Then why would He want to wait?  If I was doing this (creation stuff), I
> would want to get to the 'fun' stuff first.  I wouldn't want to watch algae
> grow.

Boy, you have a miserable image of god.

> One more note, this topic is moot.  Who really cares how the Earth was made.

Anyone interested in planning for the future.

For that matter... YOU certainly seem to.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`
From: eoin@xocolatl.com (John F. Snyder)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Re: Vote By Mail: Too Late?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 17:48:37 PDT
Reply-To: eoin@xocolatl.com
Distribution: world
Organization: Amethyst Systems, Fremont, CA

boutell@cshl.org (Tom Boutell) writes:

-> I gather that if I mailed in my Magicon supporting membership / Worldcon
-> '95 Vote today, I'd be too late to be counted. Is there any way by
-> which I *can* vote in time short of going to Orlando?


Find someone who is going to Magicon and have them hand deliver 
it for you.  

They accept ballots "on site" till Midnight on Sat.

Cut off time and day are subject to my faulty memory.


 eoin@xocolatl.com  |        Practice Random Kindness    /~~~~~~~~~~~~~\  /
 GEnie: J.Snyder18  |   *              and              <  D A R W I N  >< 
 CI$:   70313,3111  |  \|/   Senseless Acts of Beauty    \_____________/  \
 Prodigy:  NOT!!!!  |                                      _l _l  _l _l    
--------------------+        bounces?  Try:  eoin@eoin.net.netcom.com      
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons,rec.arts.sf.fandom
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: MagiCon @ Party Day/Time Set?
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:13:49 GMT

The @ Party will be in Suite 854 of the Peabody Hotel.

Food.  Nerds.  Science Fiction.  Members of the secret conspiracy that
rules the world.  Buttons, Buttons, Buttons.   Probably a data jack and
a connection to the net, but don't sit there and read news on it, OK?

Did I say buttons?

Friday Night, starting sometime after the alternate awards ceremony, where
I will be presenting the Electric Science Fiction Award for best short
story published in 1991 to...... (Only my trophy maker and I know for sure)

The ClariNet suite will be open Friday, Saturday and Sunday, and net folk
are welcome to drop by according to the schedule I will post on the door.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
From: lenny@cup.portal.com (Len E Turnbow)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: "Stargazers" Literacy group. Phone Number?
Date: Tue,  1 Sep 92 21:28:21 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: ba

A friend of mine overheard at a recent con 
that there exists a group promoting
literacy called the "Stargazers". 
Does anyone know how I can contact these
worthy people? 

T h a n k s !

E-Mail preferred, but..  
Len (408) 370-7215 (home) or 
(408) 229-3951 (work).
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: @BANG
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 07:55:14 GMT

bbs.peter@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Peter Blum) writes:

>I have seen people with @bang stuff at cons. What is @BANG?

First, it's spelled @!

Since you have an @ in your name, you are probably eligible to attend
the @! parties at cons...

Of course, you also have bbs. in your name.....
-- 
Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420
From: boutell@cshl.org (Tom Boutell)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Vote By Mail: Too Late?
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:13:13 GMT
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs

I gather that if I mailed in my Magicon supporting membership / Worldcon
'95 Vote today, I'd be too late to be counted. Is there any way by
which I *can* vote in time short of going to Orlando?

-- 
Tom Boutell, boutell@cshl.org

Clausthaler is the best non - alcoholic beer in the known universe.
Newsgroups: reca.a.arts.sf.fandom,alt.fandom.cons
From: Jon.Meltzer@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Jon Meltzer)
Subject: Magicon:  car rental discounts
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:32:37 GMT

About a week ago, someone (Laurie Mann?)  posted a description of a
Magicon car rental discount offer (Budget?). Could this be reposted or
emailed to me?   Thanks...  

Jon Meltzer 
Institute for Academic Technology, Durham, NC 27713
jonm.iat@mhs.unc.edu
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: mrs@netcom.com (Morgan Schweers)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: NEED WORLDCON INFO!
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:18:39 GMT
Organization: McAfee Associates

Greetings,
    Whee!  I have my tickets to fly, but I need some info.  Mainly the
hotel information (What hotels and where are they), but also what the at
the door price will be.

    If someone's posted up the schedule and con info like was done for
Chicon, I'd appreciate it if someone could re-post it, or email it to me.

    Thanks!

                                                          --  Morgan Schweers
From: eoin@xocolatl.com (John F. Snyder)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: Re: @BANG
Date: 29 Aug 92 03:04:33 GMT
Reply-To: eoin@xocolatl.com
Organization: Amethyst Systems, Fremont, CA

bbs.peter@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Peter Blum) writes:

-> I have seen people with @bang stuff at cons. What is @BANG?


The name for net parties when pronounced is AT-BANG.
When printed it is just @!.

Referring of course to the two main addressing methods.

Old:   bigsite!middlesite!hostsite!user

New:   user@hostsite.com

@ is pronounced AT.
! is pronounced BANG.

Thus we get the AT-BANG parties.



 eoin@xocolatl.com  |        Practice Random Kindness    /~~~~~~~~~~~~~\  /
 GEnie: J.Snyder18  |   *              and              <  D A R W I N  >< 
 CI$:   70313,3111  |  \|/   Senseless Acts of Beauty    \_____________/  \
 Prodigy:  NOT!!!!  |                                      _l _l  _l _l    
--------------------+        bounces?  Try:  eoin@eoin.net.netcom.com
From: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM (Janice Gelb)
Newsgroups: alt.fandom.cons
Subject: MagiCon @ Party Day/Time Set?
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:22:20 GMT
Reply-To: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin

Any details yet on the day and time for the MagiCon @ party, or do we
have to find someone when we get there and give the secret handshake?
;->

I'm off to the con Sunday and won't see email after 5 pm PST on Friday,
so if you guys decide after that, please look me up at the con in the
Program Ops office (room 13B in the Convention Center), where I'm
likely to be living for much of the convention.

See y'all there!

********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb                  | (415) 336-7075     
janiceg@marvin.eng.sun.com   | "A silly message but mine own" (not Sun's!) 
********************************************************************************