whatreallyhappened.com - fearless journalism or Internet loonies?

POSTED BY: SimonWho
UPDATED: Sunday, July 12, 2026 14:27
VIEWED: 6725
PAGE 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

SIMONWHO

Monday, July 11, 2005 1:35 PM

On another thread I disputed somebody's assertion that www.whatreallyhappened.com was a "respectable" source. Personally I think it's the random ravings of loonies who cannot get a cold without suspecting they are being biologically attacked by the government. Of course, it is a well known and much linked to site so obviously some people do agree with it. I'd be really interested to hear what other fellow Browncoats think.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

Does our appreciation of Firefly go hand-in-hand with a deep distrust of the government or is it simply irrelevant and the facts speak for themselves?

RUE

Monday, July 11, 2005 6:24 PM

re:

Quote:
random ravings of loonies

Admittedly I only scanned a couple dozen links, and only for sources and headlines - however, many were links to respected US news sources (Wash Post, NYTimes), respected foreign news sources (BBC, Reuters, Toronto Sun, Financial Times) and other reputable US or international news sources I'm familiar with. There were sources I didn't recognize that neverthless carried stories that were broken elsewhere and have good 'conventional' media coverage. And there were news sources AND stories I didn't recognize, including a couple of Isreali news sources.

I didn't check out the selection of stories, but I suspect that's what you have an issue with.

Based on the credibility of roughly 2/3 of what I saw, I'm inclined to think most of what is linked is factual (with the caveat that it might have a pov and one should take that into account).

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, July 11, 2005 7:16 PM

Rue note the salient point here, most of the information is well-sourced - but the site does have it's good days and bad days, of course.

It's a good one-stop shop for news other than whatever partyline the garden variety papers are trumpeting, BUT - one should practice a healthy amount of skepticism at *any* news source these days, "reputable" or not.

Cause those 'respected' sources lie or distort as much as 'loonies' do - everyone has an agenda, everyone.

If you want to actually know something, anything, in the information age, you have to check multiple sources, and sift through the agenda, spin, and blatant bovine excretement shoveling to get down to the hard facts.

And that's anything from your local paper, to a national paper, to a radical conspiracy site.
Nobody's gonna tell you anything these days without slanting it to their own point of view, period.

With that in mind - yes, it's a useful source of information, just take care to confirm it properly before putting any trust into it.

-F

ICCLEDAMES

Monday, July 11, 2005 10:30 PM

I'm currently studying a BA (Hons) degree in Journalism in Lincoln, England and one of the things we're taught is that even the most remote of rumours can have enough twist on it to make it sound plausible enough to sound real to the casual reader (or listener or viewer depending on the medium). Then, before long it has become fact in the eyes of said reader.

Similarly, some people say that newspapers have an obligation to publish that which is in the 'human interest'. However, in modern day society this ideology has been suplanted with 'Of interest to humans' - people are more interested in celebrities and TV shows that they are less intune with events that may actually have a direct impact on their lives.

In this way, readers can be de-sensitised towards more extreme-stories, making them believe them without question.

Did that make sense? Did it even tie in with the topic? Heck I can't remember...

CHRISISALL

Monday, July 11, 2005 10:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
Does our appreciation of Firefly go hand-in-hand with a deep distrust of the government or is it simply irrelevant and the facts speak for themselves?

One of the reasons I like Firefly is the ongoing struggle to keep the Alliance off their backs.
Here's a story:
When I was six our school went on a field trip to a slaughterhouse to be educated on where our hamburgers came from. The cows seemed happy outside. But their best interests were not foremost on the minds of their owners. We were told the cows didn't feel anything, but the moos and stomping feet just as the bolt hit seemed to say otherwise (we didn't actually see the cows get it, guess that would've been too much for kids). We were being lied to. And most of the class smiled and acted like they believed what they were told, not what they saw and heard.
Welcome to Distrust 101.

Yeah, I believe Governments Chrisisall

SIMONWHO

Monday, July 11, 2005 11:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
re:
Quote:
random ravings of loonies
Admittedly I only scanned a couple dozen links, and only for sources and headlines - however, many were links to respected US news sources (Wash Post, NYTimes), respected foreign news sources (BBC, Reuters, Toronto Sun, Financial Times) and other reputable US or international news sources I'm familiar with.

Oh, they link to plenty of actual respected sites, I just strongly disagree with a) their interpretation of what those sites are reporting (case in point the Israeli "early warning"), b) that they present their opinions as fact and c) that they are making some outrageous claims because they know their target audience will lap it up. The same three reasons that make Fox News so reprehensible.

ICCLEDAMES

Monday, July 11, 2005 11:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
Does our appreciation of Firefly go hand-in-hand with a deep distrust of the government or is it simply irrelevant and the facts speak for themselves?

One of the reasons I like Firefly is the ongoing struggle to keep the Alliance off their backs.
Here's a story:
When I was six our school went on a field trip to a slaughterhouse to be educated on where our hamburgers came from. The cows seemed happy outside. But their best interests were not foremost on the minds of their owners. We were told the cows didn't feel anything, but the moos and stomping feet just as the bolt hit seemed to say otherwise (we didn't actually see the cows get it, guess that would've been too much for kids). We were being lied to. And most of the class smiled and acted like they believed what they were told, not what they saw and heard.
Welcome to Distrust 101.

Yeah, I believe Governments Chrisisall

Good grief that sounds gruesome for a school trip! Even if you didn't see anything.

I remember our trip "to see how things work" was to the local supermarket. The next year, I'd left Primary school (gone to 'big' school) but the next school trip on the same theme got taken to Alton Towers to see how theme parks work.

I can't help but feel we were short-changed

CHRISISALL

Monday, July 11, 2005 11:56 PM

It was a little grusome, I guess. I almost cried on the bus back to school. But I'm a Government-cynical almost-vegeterian, so I guess it was a good thing.

Pass the veggie burger Chrisisall

RUE

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:26 AM

Well, WE went to see Hostess Twinkies and other delectables being made!

And we went to see the local newspaper being printed - back in the days when they poured the press with molten lead. Smelled bad. Probably took a few IQ points off of everyone as well. So THAT'S what happened to me! I knew I'd find an excuse, uhm, reason, yeah REASON, for the way I am.

RUE

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:34 AM

Hey SimonWho

Quote:
Oh, they link to plenty of actual respected sites, I just strongly disagree with a) their interpretation of what those sites are reporting (case in point the Israeli "early warning"), b) that they present their opinions as fact and c) that they are making some outrageous claims because they know their target audience will lap it up. The same three reasons that make Fox News so reprehensible.

I admit I didn't put a lot of effort on this site. What I saw was a bunch of links. In terms of what the website created (vs what it linked) I didn't see interpretations on the linked sites and only 1 clearly identified editorial in the body of the page, and not too much outrageous stuff being linked. Perhaps you could point out for me where to look or what to look for. Thanks.

1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE