This Just In!

[qigong chimp]

It's a rubbish paper as a source of anything other than the most superficial take of any given news story, but I don't think it has ever claimed to be. It's meant to be read on your tea break or on the bus. You can't really complain that Take a Break isn't National Geographic *.

* which has now sadly packed in after around a hundred years in print.

No surprises there:

Colonizing The Coffee Table: "National Geographic" Magazine and Erasure of Difference in the Representation of Women ,

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...graphic-righting-racist-wrongs-slow-in-coming

 

[matticus]

It's a rubbish paper as a source of anything other than the most superficial take of any given news story, but I don't think it has ever claimed to be. It's meant to be read on your tea break or on the bus. You can't really complain that Take a Break isn't National Geographic

This thread has now perfectly captured the spirit of this week's news narrative arc*:

Paper publishes career-ending slander alleging crimes with minors - we end up debating whether their headlines are well laid-out.


(*yes you can punch me for that phrase)

 

[Electric_Andy]

Astonishing news, just in.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/13/23792845/speed-limit-analysis-aaa-increase-crash-injury-death

Yes makes sense; try to speed and you don't get very far anyway. Speed when it's quiet and you're bound to hit something/someone and cause far greater damage. Stopping distances go out of most peoples' heads as soon as they've passed their test unfortunately.

I had a phrase when learning, that my instructor found funny. "It's alright going fast, it's when you need to stop that it's a problem"

 

[All uphill]

It's a rubbish paper as a source of anything other than the most superficial take of any given news story, but I don't think it has ever claimed to be. It's meant to be read on your tea break or on the bus. You can't really complain that Take a Break isn't National Geographic *.

* which has now sadly packed in after around a hundred years in print.

Point of Order.

National Geographic is now owned by Disney who have laid off all staff writers. The magazine will continue to be published with content from other writers within the Disney organisation. They apparently want to meet their readers "where they are"

I bought a lifetime subscription in 1979. Maybe it's time to cancel.

 

[Ian H]

Point of Order.

National Geographic is now owned by Disney who have laid off all staff writers. The magazine will continue to be published with content from other writers within the Disney organisation. They apparently want to meet their readers "where they are"

I bought a lifetime subscription in 1979. Maybe it's time to cancel.

I'm pleased it's a real word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Disneyfication#:~:text=: the transformation (as of something,an environment with similar qualities

 

[AndyRM]

 

[matticus]

No surprises there:

Colonizing The Coffee Table: "National Geographic" Magazine and Erasure of Difference in the Representation of Women ,

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...graphic-righting-racist-wrongs-slow-in-coming

From the intro, that may be the ultimate NACA-compliant book:

 

[icowden]

Astonishing news, just in.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/13/23792845/speed-limit-analysis-aaa-increase-crash-injury-death

I'm surprised they didn't also study the preponderance of ursine faecal matter within arboreal settings and papal orthodoxy as regards catholicism.

 

[qigong chimp]

From the intro, that may be the ultimate NACA-compliant book:

View attachment 4231

It's a Journal Article, not a book, and given the factionalised nature of this sub-forum there is no singular criterion of NACA-compliance, surely?

 

[matticus]

It's a Journal Article, not a book, and given the factionalised nature of this sub-forum there is no singular criterion of NACA-compliance, surely?

In reverse order:
- I think we've been through this before; and
- Thankyou for the correction. I'm sure it's an important one.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Point of Order.

National Geographic is now owned by Disney who have laid off all staff writers. The magazine will continue to be published with content from other writers within the Disney organisation. They apparently want to meet their readers "where they are"

I bought a lifetime subscription in 1979. Maybe it's time to cancel.

I understood the print edition was being canned, so good news if it isn't. I've subscribed on and off over the years as it was often on good deals. Very expensive to produce a magazine like NG these days though and so much similar stuff on the net.

 

[qigong chimp]

In reverse order:
- I think we've been through this before; and
- Thankyou for the correction. I'm sure it's an important one.

In no particular order:
- I'm not sure it's that important, but hey, I'm sure your right.
- What is it you think we've been through before?
- Might AS's worldview serve as a caution against too much exposure to National Geographic?

 

[Pale Rider]

Paper publishes career-ending slander

There is no slander, or rather libel, here.

What there might be is a privacy claim, which is why I and others with genuine knowledge, have been talking about the Cliff Richard house search case.

Unfortunately for the detractors, subsequent events have gone in The Sun's favour.

At least seven further complainants have come forward, ranging from sordid online behaviour to bullying in the workplace.

Thus, even though some of the complaints are relatively trivial, the public interest test is increasingly being met.

The story is also substantially true, which is another point in its favour.

 

[Ian H]

There is no slander, or rather libel, here.

What there might be is a privacy claim, which is why I and others with genuine knowledge, have been talking about the Cliff Richard house search case.

Unfortunately for the detractors, subsequent events have gone in The Sun's favour.

At least seven further complainants have come forward, ranging from sordid online behaviour to bullying in the workplace.

Thus, even though some of the complaints are relatively trivial, the public interest test is increasingly being met.

The story is also substantially true, which is another point in its favour.

This is a fascinating insight into the sordid world of tabloid hack journalism.

 

[icowden]

There is no slander, or rather libel, here.

Really. I'm pretty sure they accused him of committing multiple criminal offences with a minor.

At least seven further complainants have come forward, ranging from sordid online behaviour to bullying in the workplace.

And of course Sun Editors and Journalists are paragons of virtue.

Thus, even though some of the complaints are relatively trivial, the public interest test is increasingly being met.

You mean the usual suspects are salivating over the downfall of a previously respectable public figure.