10-09-2007, 03:44 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 773
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lswiltshire
Missing the point like this is why most of you med students fail exams. You are often not able to tell the woods from the trees!
Congoman has not compared Amigoes article with the one in the Washington Post. What he has said in plain English, is that when the Washington Post was vilified and qualified as a gossip column when it published the first article about the Watergate, it was later exonerated because the article was found to be true, and fair and unbiased.
He is then seeking to show that Amigoe is likewise unbiased because though it has posted info recently against CMU based on info in valueMd, it has also previously published positive articles about CMU. He is saying that in Curacao that they have the reputation of being unbiased and independent.
Posts on valueMD should all be good sources of information, if only folk would just post the TRUTH only. Trouble is there are a lot of folk who just post opinions on valueMD. Posting under a nom de plume does not make the truth incorrect. It just makes it anonymous.
What you perhaps have failed to see in the article is that the comment that “RL’s lawyer qualifies VMD as " a gossip website with an obscure character without any scientific value and not controlled by a government (sic)". Apparently RL's lawyer is unaware that his client has used and misused the VMD forum with more than 400 posts!!! So let us not deviate from the essential and try to blame RL's long track of dishonesty (plagiarism, lies about being accredited, false promises, etc) on alleged gutter journalism.”
Amigoes poor journalism vs what you consider America’s best is irrelevant in congomans post, because the punch line of his post is that it is hypocritical to designate VMD as " a gossip website with an obscure character without any scientific value and not controlled by a government, when one has HIMSELF used it for the same purpose. That’s the real argument. RL must be willing to play by the same rules.
We as physicians ought to behave and post on VMD without having any control by government. Why should government control free speech. But free speach should be accurate and true and fair.
VMD is not necessarily only about gossip, nor does it have to have scientific value. It presents news. It presents good advice.
VMD is doing a good job. It has helped to warn students from making very bad choices
|
I am not disputing the facts mentioned in the article, the only problem with it is that the writer is simply too lazy to do a little leg work by herslef and used information from value md. Woodward and Bernstein did a much better job on their article because they actually did research and gathered their information from important sources with in washington. RL's lawyer's description about valuemd is correct because a lot of information in here is simply opinions. |
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
