Posted Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:18 PM | Contributed by Jeff
Walt Disney World and Universal Orlando have won waivers from the federal government that exempt bare-bones health plans the two resorts offer part-time employees from new requirements imposed by this year's overhaul of the U.S. health-care system. The waivers, which were granted earlier this fall, will permit Orlando's two largest theme-park operators to continue offering limited insurance plans — commonly referred to as "mini-med" plans — that have low premiums but also low caps on annual benefit payouts.
Read more from The Orlando Sentinel.
I still think he looks like Henry Winkler. He is cool like Fonzie.
Michael Douglas, King of California. Same look on his face, too.
Neither one has my sexy blue eyes.
CP Chris said:
I watch enough Fox News (it's on in the background at work right now) to know they spend a lot of time persuading viewers that any news outlet that isn't Fox is lying to them and pushing the liberal agenda..
"You won't hear it on any of those *lefty* network news shows".... ;)
Seriously, I browse through occasionally and I hear a surprising amount of that kind of rhetoric. I does cut them quite a market share though, and in that measure it's a successful business indeed. I'd be willing to bet self-identified Fox viewers vote at surprisingly high rates as compared to those of the (formerly) "major" networks...
Maddow and Olbermann viewers are probably too stoned on their medical marijuana to remember when election day happens...
^ That's probably very true about Fox viewers voting at high rates. I've never seen any other network use fear mongering the way Fox does. "If you don't vote for people who will repeal Obamacare, Obama will personally kill your grandmother."
News is now blended with entertainment. Not limited to reporting the news but also shaping it and making it. Different outlets appeal to different groups. From what I have seen, folks tend to view outlets with which they agree as news outlets, discounting the entertainment and shaping aspects. They tend to focus on those aspects of networks with which they disagree.
What's really sad about the entire state of affairs is that we have unprecedented access to information, but most people don't seem to care to use it. We no longer live in a world with one local newspaper and three TV networks, yet it seems that most people have a narrower focus than ever.
^But when there were three networks, it seemed like "get it first but get it right" was the order of the day. With so MANY outlets now, I think "get it first" is still atop the agenda, but accuracy does seem to have suffered since there's no longer the TIME needed to make sure you've got it right. And with such a hyper-abundance of choices out there, it can easily become overwhelming for a great many people - who often choose to stick with what is "comfortable"...
It is a little bit surprising to me when I see erstwhile "journalists" go on to stardom by forsaking the integrity aspect in favor of ratings and money...OK, maybe it isn't *that* surprising... ;)
There is more access to information but not necessarily unbiased info. A lot of folks with various agendas out there. Difficult many times to know the biases.
And the 24/7 'news' networks have a lot of time to fill. So they do. Much (most?) of the time they don't cover actual news. Right now, those outlets (and the two major parties) serve to overemphasize the differences between the two political parties (particularly with respect to day-to-day lives of the vast majority of Americans).
I think the increased access to info has actually aided a lot of the rhetoric due to the ability for people to cherry pick what they want to listen to. Now anyone can find a news network, newspaper, blog, etc that extols their views and call it "news". Of course there are people that do use it to expand their horizons, but I think human nature tends to follow only the things they want to hear.
CP Chris said:
Of course there are people that do use it to expand their horizons, but I think human nature tends to follow only the things they want to hear.
I tend to believe that's exactly the reason Fox and MSNBC are far and away the two most popular cable news channels in terms of viewers.
And I get the whole noble pursuit of 'expanding your horizons' - but are these channels really telling you anything you didn't know the other side believed?
Oh yeah. Almost forgot - Death Panels are back. ;)
We had to handle "advanced directives" fifteen years ago, and nobody ever told me that patients were authorizing the hospital to euthanize them if their care became too costly. I probably wasn't n the need-to-know list... ;)
Wait a minute! Are you guys telling me the Daily Show isn't real news?
Yes. However, the Colbert Report is as real as it comes.
Real news or not, they (Daily Show) have more "journalistic integrity" than a lot of other sources. They're usually pretty fair in giving the left as much crap as they give the right.
A lot of people are crediting the Dec. 16th Daily Show with being the leading cause behind finally getting the 9/11 responders bill passed. That they can shine that much light on a topic the other news media won't touch is commendable.
CP Chris said:
That they can shine that much light on a topic the other news media won't touch is commendable.
And at the same time, incredibly sad.
You must be logged in to post