Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 340 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:15 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Aug 8, 2008
Posts: 2900
Location: Cathair na dTreabh
Another clanger in the Indo

Solar-powered Canadian houseboat washes up on Canadian beach
A makeshift solar-powered houseboat has washed up on an Irish beach after apparently drifting across the Atlantic Ocean from Canada.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:19 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Apr 1, 2010
Posts: 9248
Una wrote:
Trump entered a surreal realm. He brought a bag of snakes to a water pistol fight and left everyone wondering how on earth they were meant to deal with that. The playing field was not just uneven, it was operating on parallel plains lightyears away from each other.

Weird snake metaphor. Also parallel planes aren't uneven, and its planes, not plains. However, my gripe about Una is not that she can't write (although she can't), it's that she's the vicious guttersnipe that she accuses everyone else of being.

_________________
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" – Niels Bohr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:02 am 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Apr 4, 2010
Posts: 4407
ps200306 wrote:
Una wrote:
Trump entered a surreal realm. He brought a bag of snakes to a water pistol fight and left everyone wondering how on earth they were meant to deal with that. The playing field was not just uneven, it was operating on parallel plains lightyears away from each other.

Weird snake metaphor. Also parallel planes aren't uneven, and its planes, not plains.

:idea: But plains are macroscopically flat expanses of grassland, which is also a decent description of playing fields, so the actors might indeed be on parallel plains. Also, given the effect of soil compaction by the wheels of the lawnmowers used to maintain them, playing fields are always at least slightly uneven, even disregarding damage caused by studded boots,
Now ordinarily, playing fields would be coplanar, if we were to ignore the earth's surface curvature (some people soon to be appointed to high political office might not even realise that this last point is a simplification :wink: ) rather than parallel, but they could reasonably be parallel (at least if extended), if one were to be located, for example, on the roof of a skyscraper in New York and the other at ground level, in which case the apparent anomaly would be resolved.
The separation of several light years is, on the face of it, more problematic.
However, let us consider a person navigating from the rooftop playing field in Manhattan to one a considerable distance from it. For the sake of argument and to give ourselves plenty of space to work, we will locate this playing field in Perth, Western Australia, the most distant large city from New York. Now, if our hypothetical navigator or commentator, in attempting to travel from one to the other and after taking the gold plated elevator to street level, had lost his or her bearings (as poor Una so clearly appears to have done), then rather than travelling along a great circle, that being the shortest route between two points on the surface of a sphere, he or she might set off at some angle to this bearing and, in so doing, trace a kind of helix along the surface of the globe, before reaching the destination, a bit like a very large and tightly wound version of those concertina like globular lamp shades. If the offset were small enough, this journey could indeed extend over several light years, thus solving our conundrum.


Exercise for the student.

Has Una:
(a) discovered a novel, geometrically elegant and uniquely eloquent description of the current state of American politics?
or
(b) written a load of drivel?

Protractors may be used. Do not attempt to write on two sheets of paper simultaneously.

_________________
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.


Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
Book I, Chapter X, Part II,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:28 am 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Apr 1, 2010
Posts: 9248
Yes. Yes, I'm sure that's what Una was getting at. :?

N.B. No matter what direction you set off on Earth you'll travel in a Great Circle unless you continually change direction. But supposing you could wind your way around in some sort of helix. Several light years -- let's call it four -- is a trillion Earth circumferences. It would be quite hard to miss Perth that many times. If we drew that many meridian lines they'd be spaced only 0.04 millimetres apart at the equator. Una may not have realised this. Alternatively she may have been treating Perth as an ideal mathematical point, and this is truly precision journalism after all.

Image

_________________
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" – Niels Bohr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 6:28 pm 
Offline
Old Time Landlord

Joined: Feb 19, 2009
Posts: 368
ps200306 wrote:
Una wrote:
Trump entered a surreal realm. He brought a bag of snakes to a water pistol fight and left everyone wondering how on earth they were meant to deal with that. The playing field was not just uneven, it was operating on parallel plains lightyears away from each other.

Weird snake metaphor. Also parallel planes aren't uneven, and its planes, not plains. However, my gripe about Una is not that she can't write (although she can't), it's that she's the vicious guttersnipe that she accuses everyone else of being.

Just can't see beyond your geometro-normative cis-grammatical preferences, can you?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 7:16 pm 
Online
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Jun 9, 2008
Posts: 7018
Patriarchal grammar fascists. Reflective of the apparent masculinity crisis that engulfed the US according to Tintin O'foole at the weekend.

_________________
“Don't ask the barber if you need a haircut—and don’t ask an academic if what he does is relevant.” Nassim Nicholas Taleb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:20 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Jan 4, 2013
Posts: 16954
Location: To the right of the decimal place
BertieInExile wrote:
ps200306 wrote:
Una wrote:
Trump entered a surreal realm. He brought a bag of snakes to a water pistol fight and left everyone wondering how on earth they were meant to deal with that. The playing field was not just uneven, it was operating on parallel plains lightyears away from each other.

Weird snake metaphor. Also parallel planes aren't uneven, and its planes, not plains. However, my gripe about Una is not that she can't write (although she can't), it's that she's the vicious guttersnipe that she accuses everyone else of being.

Just can't see beyond your geometro-normative cis-grammatical preferences, can you?


:-D

_________________
“If you're afraid - don't do it. If you're doing it - don't be afraid!” ― Genghis Khan

"Do, or do not; there is no try" -- Yoda


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Wed Nov 16, 2016 12:26 am 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Apr 1, 2010
Posts: 9248
BertieInExile wrote:
Just can't see beyond your geometro-normative cis-grammatical preferences, can you?

Oh no! Another isosceles justice warrior! :wink:

_________________
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" – Niels Bohr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:31 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Feb 9, 2010
Posts: 9019
I had the misfortune to hear Cathal MacCoille on Morning Ireland today talking to some union head (IIRC) about the high cost of Irish mortgages. Did anyone raise the near impossibility of repossessing defaulters' properties as a factor?

Did they fruit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 1:29 pm 
Offline
Property Magnate

Joined: Apr 8, 2008
Posts: 743
Barney Gumble wrote:
I had the misfortune to hear Cathal MacCoille on Morning Ireland today talking to some union head (IIRC) about the high cost of Irish mortgages. Did anyone raise the near impossibility of repossessing defaulters' properties as a factor?

Did they fruit.


I think it was Michael McGrath, the FF Finance rep.
I wasn't the only one screaming at the radio then...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:47 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Nov 4, 2011
Posts: 5259
Location: SthDub
Una laments the the rise of social media as a news source (Trump has really upset the snowflakes if they're quitting the Facebook!) rather than folk using reliable and truthful mainstream media such as The Guardian and the Irish Times I assume.
But not the Indo - no, they're not worthy

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/una-m ... -1.2873471
Quote:
the past few days, I’ve spoken to several people who have deleted their Facebook accounts. They have different reasons for cutting the cord but, for many, Donald Trump’s election was the final straw.

When it comes to the US election, there is the inescapable feeling that all of these new media channels we’ve created across social media are screwing us up. They’re messing with our perceptions of the world and of people who are not like us. They’re lying to us. They’re enraging us, and maybe they are not good for us. We have built echo chambers and filter bubbles and we have more information than ever before, yet we are getting things wildly wrong.
The signposting from social media to news sites further reinforces the filter bubble. You are directed to stories and points of view that reinforce your opinions, which leads to a false sense of security that your opinions are more prevalent than opposing or differing ones.

When everything is emphatic, people become increasingly erratic. Older news outlets are often reduced to mourn-porn, stories of personal illness and tragedy. In Ireland, Independent.ie in particular has become less of a news website and more of a hyper-human interest supermarket tabloid.


Meanwhile, here's 1 of today's trending stories on the IT website
Quote:
Rubber Bandit: Galway man cons shop assistant into buying out-of-date condoms

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-an ... -1.2873679


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2016 10:57 am 
Online
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Jun 9, 2008
Posts: 7018
Quote:
In the past few days, I’ve spoken to several people who have deleted their Facebook accounts.


Why am I reminded of Isabel Morton's taxi driver?


Quote:
In the aftermath of Trump’s victory, subscriptions to the Guardian, ProPublica, the New York Times, the Atlantic and other outlets jumped. The reason is that people still value and want decent, fact-based, investigate journalism authored by professionals who know what they’re talking about. Surely a basic tenet of business is to do what you’re good at.


:roll:

Quote:
The question came in letters. (“To editors and writers of The NYT,” one reader wrote, “you were so wrong for so long. You misled your readers and were blinded by your own journalistic bigotry.”) It came in Facebook posts. (“You were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans,” the filmmaker Michael Moore wrote in a post shared more than 100,000 times.) Most ominously, it came in the form of canceled subscriptions, something that will surely be monitored.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/busin ... wrong.html
Quote:
But bad or sloppy journalism doesn’t fully capture the Times’ sins. Not after it announced that it was breaking its rules of coverage because Trump didn’t deserve fairness.

As media columnist Jim Rutenberg put it in August, most Times reporters saw Trump “as an abnormal and potentially dangerous candidate” and thus couldn’t be even-handed.

That wasn’t one reporter talking — it was policy. The standards, developed over decades to force reporters and editors to be fair and to build public trust, were effectively eliminated as too restrictive for the Trump phenomenon.

The man responsible for that rash decision, top editor Dean Baquet, later said the Rutenberg piece “nailed” his thinking, and went on to insist that Trump “challenged our language” and that “He will have changed journalism.”

Baquet also said of the struggle for fairness, “I think that Trump has ended that struggle,” adding: “we now say stuff. We fact-check him. We write it more powerfully that it’s false.”


http://nypost.com/2016/11/11/new-york-t ... -on-trump/

_________________
“Don't ask the barber if you need a haircut—and don’t ask an academic if what he does is relevant.” Nassim Nicholas Taleb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:08 am 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Nov 9, 2006
Posts: 4482
Location: South of the Border
On twitter recently Colette Brown retweeted a piece by some American giving out about Kobach.Colette and the author were asked to provide a link as the original tweet suggested that Kobach had framed a law that targeted the old, and certain minorities. I watched this with interest. Nothing came back from Colette or the American. SHe was repeated challenged and came back eventually with this cutting reply

Colette Browne ‏@colettebrowne Nov 15

Colette Browne Retweeted Urlofcork

YES - I don't factcheck every article I tweet. I have a job. And require sleep.

Colette Browne added,
Urlofcork @urlofcork
@colettebrowne One is a mirror image of the other ? Are u serious you tweet stuff without doing ANY checking
0 replies 0 retweets 12 likes


Now twitter is grand in its own way but I would expect any journalist to either come up with original stuff or else be sure that what they are sending out is correct....or is that just me


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:31 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jun 16, 2007
Posts: 2531
Location: Oighearland
"Journalist Una Mullally is the government's new youth LGBT czar"

http://www.thejournal.ie/una-mullally-c ... =shortlink

_________________
advice to future unemployed TDs at the next general election: dont look at it as a failure, see it as an opportunity to 'upskill'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sloppy sloppy journalism
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:04 pm 
Offline
Speculator

Joined: Apr 27, 2014
Posts: 420
Why let an analysis of the facts get in the way of an unquestioned n-th hand received wisdom from the smug nodding donkey collective that is the Irish Times?

This is a poorly written article that conflates a number of disparate observations without combining them into a coherent article.

The Bank of Ireland mortgage repackaging relates to the preparations for IFRS 9 and the need to account for losses differently and to crystallise future losses.

Residential property prices are increasing because of an imbalance between supply and demand.

For a former business editor, the article is exceptionally slapdash and shoddy. It has all the appearance of a few words strung together at the last minute to meet a deadline.

Quote:
John McManus

John McManus is the Opinion Editor of The Irish Times. He is the former Business Editor and has been writing and commenting on business for 20 years. He writes a weekly column dealing with topical issues.


One outlandishly fatuous and ludicrous piece of gibberish is worth highlighting:

Quote:
It would have been a heroic move by the government to suggest to its creditors that it was planning to exit the bailout with Nama projected to make a loss of many billions in order to ensure that houses would be affordable in the coming recovery.

Instead, the Nama loans were sold off to the highest bidder and many developers were allowed refinance themselves out of Nama; the net result is that the price of building land remains at a level detached from the fundamentals of the economy.


Is this fool seriously suggesting that NAMA (that is Irish taxpayers) should have absorbed even greater costs to somehow allow the loans it took over be sold at a lower cost? How would this be “heroic”?

How on earth would this have made residential property more affordable?

What has selling NAMA assets at to the highest bidder got to do with the high cost of development land? There is no shortage of building land and no shortage of sites. There is just a shortage of willpower to compel its use through a vacant site levy.

How much does the planning process and associated delays and costs, planning restrictions such as apartment size and orientation, super-economic planning levies and Part V contribute to the effective cost of building land and of final build costs? The generally agreed estimate is that these factors unnecessarily contribute around €50,000 to cost of the development of a residential unit.

Capital in property Ireland is currently directed towards acquisition rather than development because the former is considerably easier that the latter.

Does the Irish Times have an Opinion Editor Editor to deshitify material like this?

Does the man even know what a bubble is, where asset factors play a disproportionate role in price growth?

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/the-s ... -1.2924625

John McManus Phoning-In Shite Suffering From A Hangover wrote:
The State is about to create another housing bubble

The Irish economy is set to repeat its old mistake of excess mortgage-lending

The run-up to Christmas is always a good time for burying bad news and this year was no different.

On the Friday before Christmas, Bank of Ireland announced it was going to have to put more money aside to absorb possible losses on Irish residential mortgages.

Just how much more money was not very clear but it would appear to run into several hundred million euro.

The statement was extremely technical and did not actually talk about losses or defaults.

But the point is clear. The bank had already put aside some money to absorb losses that might occur as a result of people not being able to pay their mortgages. It now seems that more people than expected are going to default and the bank has had to put some extra money aside.

It is as timely a reminder as you could hope for that the Irish banks are still broken and still fighting their way through a mountain of problem mortgages as a result of their reckless lending in the run-up to the 2007 crash.

The banks have made huge efforts to get on top of their mortgage problems but – at best – there is substantial lingering uncertainty around the ability of a significant number of people to repay mortgages taken out during the boom.

At worst, the problems are much bigger than the banks are prepared to accept even at this stage.

Runaway property

We are in effect still paying the price for the moment when the traditional multiples linking mortgages to income were thrown out the window as banks and lenders chased a runaway property market.

It is scarcely believable that we are about to do it all again. Yet somehow we seem to have contrived a situation where the only way to put people in houses is to circumvent the rules brought in after the crash precisely to make sure we did not go down the same road again.

Here we are at the start of 2017 with property prices expected to roar ahead by 8 per cent and the Government launching a “Help-to-buy” scheme with no purpose other than to allow people to circumvent Central Bank rules aimed at stopping the banks lending people more money than they can repay (and in the process keeping a lid on house prices).

The reason for this madness would appear to be that builders will not build houses at current prices because they will not make enough money.

The main reason for this seems to be that they paid so much for the land in the first place.

We are again running the risk of being a construction industry with an economy attached to it.

It is hard to understand how we arrived at this state of affairs when, less than four years ago, the government was firmly in control of all the levers needed to dictate the cost of building land and the price of houses.

It had, through Nama, effective control of acres of building land nominally owned by developers, the bulk of whom where insolvent.

It also owned the banks and thus was in a position to exert influence over lending practices. It was a level of state economic control rarely seen these days outside of China.

Act of folly

It is starting to look as though the big mistake with Nama was to set it up as a standalone entity that had to make a profit, or at least cover its debts. As we face into a rerun of the reckless lending and rocketing house prices that characterised the previous boom and crash.

Would it were that simple. Such wishful thinking belies both the economic reality facing the State in 2012 and the lack of bandwidth in our system.

It would have been a heroic move by the government to suggest to its creditors that it was planning to exit the bailout with Nama projected to make a loss of many billions in order to ensure that houses would be affordable in the coming recovery.

Instead, the Nama loans were sold off to the highest bidder and many developers were allowed refinance themselves out of Nama; the net result is that the price of building land remains at a level detached from the fundamentals of the economy.

But even if anyone had the foresight to suggest an alternative course of action, the ability of the system to bring it about has to be seriously questioned. This is, after all, a country that cannot collect water charges.

They could have done it in China, of course, but then again they are not so hot on democracy over there.


There are discontinuities in the available mortgage lending data from the Banking & Payments Federation Ireland and the Central Bank. However, a more complete view of residential mortgage lending is:

Code:
    Quarter     Residential             BTL           Total     New Lending Net New Lending
    Mar 2005                                                           5,996
    Jun 2005                                                           8,397
    Sep 2005                                                           9,380
    Dec 2005                                                          10,341
    Mar 2006                                                           8,437
    Jun 2006                                                          10,130
    Sep 2006                                                          10,962
    Dec 2006                                                          10,343
    Mar 2007                                                           7,809
    Jun 2007                                                           8,733
    Sep 2007                                                           8,984
    Dec 2007                                                           8,282
    Mar 2008                                                           6,266
    Jun 2008                                                           7,566
    Sep 2008                                                           5,678
    Dec 2008                                                           3,539
    Mar 2009                                                           1,998
    Jun 2009                                                           2,173
    Sep 2009         118,649                         118,649           2,145
    Dec 2009         118,343                         118,343           1,760          -2,066
    Mar 2010         118,057                         118,057           1,220          -1,506
    Jun 2010         117,718                         117,718           1,305          -1,644
    Sep 2010         117,402                         117,402           1,239          -1,555
    Dec 2010         116,683                         116,683             982          -1,701
    Mar 2011         115,958                         115,958             577          -1,302
    Jun 2011         115,089                         115,089             624          -1,493
    Sep 2011         114,412                         114,412             623          -1,300
    Dec 2011         113,477                         113,477             639          -1,574
    Mar 2012         112,688                         112,688             450          -1,239
    Jun 2012         111,967          31,253         143,220             524
    Sep 2012         111,241          31,052         142,293             663          -1,590
    Dec 2012         110,763          31,159         141,922             999          -1,370
    Mar 2013         109,905          30,920         140,825             331          -1,428
    Jun 2013         109,147          30,626         139,773             518          -1,570
    Sep 2013         108,539          30,340         138,879             750          -1,644
    Dec 2013         107,376          29,667         137,043             896          -2,732
    Mar 2014         106,522          29,368         135,890             568          -1,721
    Jun 2014         106,197          29,157         135,354             820          -1,356
    Sep 2014         105,515          28,822         134,337           1,126          -2,143
    Dec 2014         104,948          28,007         132,955           1,341          -2,723
    Mar 2015         104,265          27,342         131,607           1,002          -2,350
    Jun 2015         103,472          26,661         130,133           1,091          -2,565
    Sep 2015         102,561          26,429         128,990           1,335          -2,478
    Dec 2015         101,630          26,020         127,650           1,438          -2,778
    Mar 2016         100,870          25,623         126,493             999          -2,156
    Jun 2016         100,292          25,218         125,510           1,286          -2,269
    Sep 2016          99,856          24,613         124,469           1,558          -2,599


The amounts are in millions.

Irish Banks have been consistently decreasing their net residential mortgage lending.

Gross new residential mortgage lending is running at around 15% of the peak values.

Net new lending has been consistently negative since the Central Bank started to publish its aggregate residential mortgage lending statistics.

Where is the reckless lending?

This is not a bubble. It is a trough of despair.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 340 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A41, slasher, Yahoo [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to: