RG, I'm not really familiar with the Lions situation you talked about, nor do I care, but in general, I agree with what you seem to be saying - the rottenness of the media in general. It also says something about the good quality of your post by who is disagreeing with you.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Right. It doesn’t matter why the media writes garbage. They write garbage. You could say a drug dealer deals drugs because people want to buy drugs and put the blame on the buyer. It’s the same thing. Just because people click it doesn’t mean doing it is honorable.Originally Posted by texaspackerbacker
Formerly known as JustinHarrell.
Um drugs are potentially fatal. A news story isn't.
Reminder: 95% of the information you get about the Packers is from a news source. The same could be said for draft information. If you think the JSO or SI or the Athletic are the equivalent of drug dealers, maybe you should quit reading.
They are fatal because someone ingested them, not because someone sold them. Potato Tomato.
All this media talk is walking to close to the sun though (politics) and someone is going to end up suspended if we don't drop it.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Sometimes you sure are thick.
If no one was buying drugs there wouldn't be drug dealers. I am not placing blame anywhere. It is simply a fact. No demand for a product, no one provides a product.
There are a lot of reputable sources of good information. Not all sources are garbage. Just because you click on garbage sources and stories doesn't mean most or all media is garbage.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
I'm going to go ahead and call you out Dan, because this is a very common tactic of yours. You CLEARLY placed blame on the consumer and then immediately resorted to being a raging dick when someone pointed out the problem with it. I'm not even disagreeing with you that the consumer is the problem, but you can't make that post then call Tex thick for pointing out an equivalent by playing the victim and pretending innocent you NEVER placed blame. You can call tex thick for a LOT of other things, but in this case you are simply coming across as a jerk.
How is this NOT placing blame.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
It's a factual statement. You must first apply your own opinion to reach an assumption something is wrong before there can be blame.
Not taking sides on the whole issue, but that's how understood his point.
That being said, the implication of blame was a very reasonable assumption to reach given the context.
Somewhat fair. I was probably grumpy. I'm partly sorry Dan, but Tex didn't elevate to name calling, he made a valid point and I thought the instant name calling was beneath you. If tex did it in reverse I guess i would ignore it because its not beneath him.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Uh, thanks I guess hahahahaha. Did somebody namecall me? I didn't even notice.
I had to go way back to the previous page to see what you were talking about. It was RG who was his victim of one of the "usual suspects", although I did strongly agree with RG.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Wow, I post and then get busy and when I get back a shit storm has occurred.
I was name calling RashanGary not Tex.
I think I was really just stating a fact. I was trying not to make a moral equivalence between drug dealers and hack "media".
I also agree with Fritz that I was being simplistic in my opinion. Yes, people try to increase demand by advertising/marketing or in the case of scumbags making their product addictive.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote