Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (2880)	3/2/2002 11:25:58 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

His bias is evident throughout the article. Kurtz is the first thing I look for in the Post. Unfortunately, I can't always read him first since his column is usually posted late, but, I digress. The reason I look to Kurtz is that he covers and references interesting material from other sources and puts the pieces into some context or theme. This is a wonderful service because it saves me the leg work. Subsequently, I started following some of the blogs for this very same reason. I can't tell you how much I appreciate those who are providing this service. It's a killer internet app, IMO. In my mind, Kurtz's Post column plays the blog roll. It just does it in the mainstream media rather than out of some obscure web site. When I read his article, I saw him pointing me to an article the expressed an interesting point of view and framing the article's POV as a counter to conventional wisdom. It seemed to me that he captured the essence of both sides well enough. I saw him saying "this is interesting" rather than supporting the position of the article he referenced. I don't understand why you and Ruffini saw it otherwise. I saw Kristol on some news show yesterday where he was explaining both sides of some issue, I don't recall which. I miss seeing him on Sunday mornings with Stephanopolous. I saw the latter doing the same thing on Sunday. Now, here are two guys who are clearly partisan, but they can and do explain both sides. Maybe they don't express the "other" side quite as nicely as they get the one to which they subscribe, but they do a reasonable, professional job of it. I don't respect talking heads who are so partisan that they can't explain the opposition's point of view with a straight face. Likewise, I don't respect posters who can't or won't at least take a stab at understanding where the other guy is coming from. So I'm reluctant to be too critical of those who make an honest effort to explain both sides but miss by a bit. Karen P.S. I'm really distressed about the prospect of losing Nightline. It's one of those rare news shows that are intelligent and only person speaks at a time.