Skip to main content

View Diary: Time magazine picks Occupy Wall Street as the top news story of 2011 (97 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Killing of Osama meant nothing (0+ / 0-)

    Seriously, is the Eternal War on a Vague Ideaology over now? That was a complete non-story. What changed because Osama is dead? Nothing.

    OWS is the world wide response to the debt issue, and yes, it is bigger than that issue because the "debt issue" is only really an issue for those who hold the debt, i.e. the 1%. I mean, if OWS can change the world wide dialogue from "OH NOES, ALL THIS DEBT!" to "Screw this income inequality!"in under two months, then debt can't really be that big of a story, can it?

    Arab Spring is an interesting story, for sure, but there is NO WAY it impacts as many lives as OWS.

    Surely you can find some other, better stories than these lame non-starters to replace the one story you don't want to hear any more about? Anyone who has been paying attention knows which people here hate OWS.

    •  your own internal prioritization (0+ / 0-)

      wasn't the question.

      question is top news story of the year.  careful, your bias is showing.

      •  As is yours! Amazing how that works (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Deep Texan

        If you say something, then that thing is more important to you than the thing you didn't say. What amazing insight, why don't you apply it to yourself first?

        This isn't about my internal prioritization. This is about effects. What effect did Osama's death have on your life? What effect did it have on politics? On the war on terror?

        Some people think the Kardashian wedding was the biggest story of the year. Doesn't make them right. And they have given me as much proof of their point of view as you have: none.

        Seriously, the sense of privilege on display here is mind boggling. When you say that OBL's death was a big story, that is just objective truth. But when I say it wasn't, that is bias.

        Get over your sense of privilege. You are not special. Your ideas are not special. You are not the center of the universe. You are not "correct" while everyone else is "biased." Your ideas do not enjoy special privileges. They are not demonstrably  more normal or pragmatic or realistic than anyone else's ideas. Those are just words you throw around to appeal to authority and poison the well of other people's ideas.

        •  i was refering to top news of 2011 (0+ / 0-)

          http://www.mediabistro.com/...

          Where is OWS again?  I bring this up not to put down the movement but because I like facts.  OWS isn't the top story of 2011.

          •  Everyone likes fact (0+ / 0-)

            You aren't special this way and it is egotistical in the extreme to claim that. It is an appeal to authority and poisoning the well, as I mentioned. Your side has "facts" but the other side is "biased." It is only your own sense of privilege that keeps you from understanding how ridiculous that stance looks to other people.

            But as you pointed out in your prior post, the facts that all of us choose to focus on indicate our biases.

            Time is an American news magazine. This is about American news stories. There really is no objective way to measure the "top" story except popularity. How do you even define top? Is it the most important? Who decides? Is it the most searched for? What about those who do not use the Internet? Is it the most column inches, the most airtime? That doesn't determine impact. In fact, claiming to know the top news story of the year, that year, is just silly. Most of the time these things are only clear in hindsight.

            But with you, I've noted a distinct anti-OWS bias before now, and so it makes sense top me that you would attempt to downplay the importance of OWS.

            This is Time's story of the year. Other publications may have different lists. There is no real objective way to say what was the most important story, especially in such a short time frame. There is no "THE" top story of the year. You are allowed to consider other stories as more important than OWS. We are allowed to think you are dumb and wrong for thinking that.

            Just remember, you are not the person who gets to decide anything for anyone else except you. You don't get to claim normal and unbiased for yourself and exclude everyone else.

            •  Time's selections are fluff period (0+ / 0-)

              OWS isn't on the list of top news stories for 2011 unless you go past the other main top stories for 2011.

              Compare Time's top ten to most of the lists for top news stories of 2011.  

              •  Interesting opinion (0+ / 0-)

                As I noted, your opinions are only your opinions. You are welcome to them, but you don't get to position your opinions as fact and other people's opinions as biased.

                You have not said what your criteria for top story are, so as I mentioned, for all we know you could be going on the recommendation of your dog. What are your criteria? How do you, personally, go about choosing a to story for the year?

                I imagine the decision process goes something like this: "Does this story match my biases and world view? If not, it is not an important story because it is a LIE. Only my opinions are based in fact."

                You still haven't explained your hide rate either. Getting your feelings hurt is not a reason to hide rate, you know. I wasn't personally insulting, or breaking any other site rules. Your attempts to silence me won't work.

                •  you are making my case for me (0+ / 0-)

                  you believe it's the top story.  that's your opinion.

                  i am talking about the most viewed, talked about biggest news stories of 2011.  you can get that info various ways and none of them has OWS at the top except for Time.

                  if you look over Time's list then you should see their top stories of 2011 don't jive with the most talked about, top stories of 2011.

                  AOL lists it as number 8.  Do you own research but remember, I am not talking about my opinion.  I am talking about the most viewed, talked about, biggest new stories of 2011.

                  •  Talked about? (0+ / 0-)

                    How do you know that?!? You listened to everyone's conversation?!? Are you a GOD?!? How do you rate most viewed when you don't count radio, TV, and print?

                    You have not presented any data outside one article on Huffpo that proves your point! You just keep repeating the same non factual opinions and calling them facts.

                    Prove that another story was talked about more. Prove it had more airtime, more TV time, more column inches AND more Internet searches.

                    Your egotism is unbelievable. Again, your opinions are not facts, and calling them facts without backing them up makes you look childish.

                    •  i researched it (0+ / 0-)
                      Your egotism is unbelievable.

                      do your own research.  prove that OWS is the top story.

                      •  I'm not making that claim (0+ / 0-)

                        I'm not making any claim about what was or was not the most important story. You see, any sort of claim like that, from Time or Huffpo or you or me is what we call "opinion." There are a million ways to define "top," and no one way is right. To one person, "top" means most important to them, as in, the story that affected their life the most. For another person, it might be the story most discussed around the water cooler. For another person, it might mean the story that got the most airtime, or the most column inches, or the most Internet searches. We can debate whose criteria are the most valid until the cows come home and get turned into hamburger, and we won't come to agreement.

                        I'm here to discuss the fact that Time magazine considers OWS to be the top news story of the year. We can both agree that that is a fact, right? Time magazine named them the top news story of the year. You don't feel that is a valid choice, as other news stories were more important to you. OWS was the most important to me, and it certainly had more impact on my life than the death of some failed old terrorist or similar uprisings in small foreign countries.

                        OWS is the top news story to me, and it is a fact that that is my opinion.

                          •  Where? (0+ / 0-)

                            Look, there is no objective "top" anything. It is all opinion. Top ten lists are opinion! What kind of person doesn't understand that?!? One needs to define "top" before they can even attempt to bring facts into the picture. Top ten tallest buildings is factual. Top ten movies? Opinion. Top ten stories, books, paintings, sculptures, sex scenes, freak-outs, whatever: pure opinion.

                            I, personally, feel that OWS was more important, to me, than any other story. That is my opinion. Your opinion may differ. But it is only your opinion, that is my point. It is not fact.

                          •  top 10 most expensive cars (0+ / 0-)

                            top 10 longest books.

                          •  Hmmm, reading problems? (0+ / 0-)

                            You didn't read my post. I gave the example of "top ten tallest buildings" as factual. But "top ten coolest buildings" would be opinion, as would "Top ten buildings of the year." Honestly, do you think that a list of "top ten buildings of 2011" could possibly be anything but opinion?

                            Please give it a rest. Honestly, do you think you are "winning" this debate?

                          •  i am a numbers guy (0+ / 0-)

                            so i would take top ten buildings to mean various factors have been studied and these ten are at the top of those categories.  i would stick to the factual articles rather than opinion pieces.  top has some meaning.  whether it's specific or general.

                            data aggregated together to provide relevant information.

                            as in the Arab spring had more articles, more comments, went on longer and even had a bigger impact than any other news story of the year.  

                          •  How would you pick the factors? (0+ / 0-)

                            Opinion. You really don't know the difference between fact and your opinion. There is no possible way we can communicate.

                            For a so called numbers guy, you are very fuzzy headed. Some words are too vague, too fuzzy to be used in a factual context, and "top" is one of them because the factors that make up "top" are all opinion, too.

                            In my OPINION, Arab spring had fewer articles, with less comments, and was in the public eye for only a brief period. But I am not claiming to have done any research, you are, so provide it. All you have provided are dubious online sources talking about other online sources. Your links do not mention radio time, TV time, column inches, or anything else that is relevant to defining "top."

                            I will take a lack of links to the research you used to come to your conclusion as an admission that you have done none.

                            Oh god, the lack of logic, it makes my brain hurt:

                            top has some meaning.  whether it's specific or general.

                            If the meaning is general, then it is not specific enough to be factual. Generalizations are not factual! Seriously, I am done with you wasting my time like this. Good day, sir. Please do not take my lack of further communication with you as anything other than total exasperation on my part, specifically, I am not going away because you "won" anything. Unless you count annoying someone until they walk away in disgust as a win.

          •  Oh, a hide rate? For what? (0+ / 0-)

            You mad, bro?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site