December 14, 2005

• This really didn't make me happy per se but I do like the idea.
• Yup, cause Brazillian Mayor Proposes to Outlaw Death is far more important for me to know. Shame on them for covering a web site (with the secret santa story) that might make a process that millions go through every year a simpler one. It's arguable (i.e. generally accepted as fact, and for a good reason) that there's a tremendous bias in the mainstream media towards sensationalistic and tragic stories. I have no problem with a site that wants to try to balance that out. Do I think that it should be someone's only news source? No. Do I think that there's any reason it should make one ashamed to be human, not to want to get news that focuses primarily on how terrible the world is? Again, no. Also, their site is relatively new, as I understand it (though I heard about them through On The Media a couple of months ago). If their business model is reasonably successful, then they will likely be able to get more stories of substance that still have a positive focus, hopefully well written, researched, and maybe even of general use to the everyday person. Oh, look, here's a fire in New Jersey, killed three people. That's vital right there. I'm sure nobody has died in a fire before, and somehow, this is going to change the way I live, aside from perhaps feeling badly that people that I don't know have died? If Happy News dot com had an RSS feed, I might actually read it, but I don't get any news that doesn't flow either from The Daily Show or my RSS reader, so that seems unlikely. Still, I like their spirit, and I hope they do well.
• Hmm. This is happy news? Miami police take new tack against terror "Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and out and hand out leaflets about terror threats." I'm so happy to live in a police state!
• Yeah, how are photos from the depression supposed to make me happy? Sure they're in color, but why not photos from the roaring 20's or some saccarine 50's photos? I guess there weren't any to be had today.
• The 30,000 jobs cut by General Motors Corp. last month? You won't read it in HappyNews, but stories about hiring are welcome. Even sports stories are mostly out of bounds, "because one team wins and one team loses," Reese explained. If you like this stuff, fine. Just, please, don't call it a "news site."
• I can't for the life of me figure out the over-the-top condescension in this post. A quick internet search reveals news sites devoted to such "hard-hitting" topics as cycling, cars, horse racing, movies and celebrities, computers, restaurants, etc. I don't begrudge any of those sites for their particular focus or editorial slant, nor do their existence make me want to renounce my humainty. You clearly have some very specific ideas about what is and is not news, but I really can't see how happynews falls short of being news. It's just yet another news site with yet another focus.
• I can't for the life of me figure out the over-the-top condescension in this post. Takes one to know one, obviously.
• Here's your Secret Satan Santa, you feel-gooders. NSFW, NSF people that hold Christmas as something more than shopping season. NSF people that are afraid to, eh, kiss under the mistletoe. Did I mention it's NSFW? It is NSFW.
• Holy Christ I just opened that last link and now I'm getting fired why didn't you tell me this link could get me fired by the way what's NSFW mean?
• Takes one to know one, obviously. Oh come on, Hawthorne. I think it's a lame exercise too, but "news" can cover any old thing, really, as long as it's new or not widely known, etcetry.
• I don't know why, but it really bugs the crap out of me when people say "I wish they would report some GOOD news once in a while." It just seems such a stupid question.
• It's arguable (i.e. generally accepted as fact, and for a good reason) that there's a tremendous bias in the mainstream media towards sensationalistic and tragic stories. I have no problem with a site that wants to try to balance that out. Sandspider, I completely agree that mainstream media spends too much time on sensational and tragic stories. But IMO "balancing" that requires not "good news" but "real news."
• But "real news" has to fight with the establishment's "sensational news", whereas "good news" can ride the backlash. Of course, they're not entirely successful with their only good news, as evidenced by some of the example articles listed above, but the internet is a big place. Having a thoroughly niche product like this is not a bad thing, and it doesn't prevent any other type of news from being reported. I can understand why you wouldn't want to make it your primary news source, or perhaps even any of your news source, but there's a big line between something being not right for you and it being bad for the world, and I just don't see this being bad for the world. Personally, if I were editor in chief for a proper newspaper, I would make it practical news rather than good or bad. Fluff feel-good pieces, or watch the fiery wreck at the side of the road, would not make it in. It would be news that you could, if you were so inclined, use as a guide to changing your habits in order to affect either yourself or others. Voting, personal finance, well being, what have you. But not for warm fuzzies, and not for schadenfreude.
• So Trapper John got his star on the Walk of Fame. That's happy news. But he came way later than Ryan Seacrest. That's unhappy news. Curse you, Happy News, you bald-faced liars!
• not "good news" but "real news." Please to define, thenky0p! Also see Rose Colored News "good news for progressives about politics, the environment, health, and more."
• star, seeing as how I didn't recognize him but only vaguely recalled his name, but still -- he's miles ahead of Ryan Seacrest in terms of claims to stardom...)
• Coloured news? No-one wants to hear news about coloured people, you idiot.
• Oh right.
• Was it the guy who played Trapper John on M*A*S*H, or the guy who played him on Trapper John, M.D.?
• "Yeah, how are photos from the depression supposed to make me happy?" It's supposed to make you happy you're not them.
• I hear what you're saying, Sandspider, but for some reason I continue to have a problem with a site that publishes good news about General Motors (hiring news) but not bad news (layoffs). I can't help but feel that there's some kind of abdication of duty to try to find the truth, which is central to journalism, at play here.
• So, get a site that's really pessimistic, and that site, and your good to go.
• I can't help but feel that there's some kind of abdication of duty to try to find the truth Jeff Gannon? AWOL from TANG? Cocaine abuse? DWI? Skull and Bones? "Bad" Intelligence on WMD? Plame Case Leak? Abu Gharib extent? Gitmo abuse? ANWR drilling? DeLay? CIA secret prisons? Oh that's enough good news for now.
• Was it the guy who played Trapper John on M*A*S*H, or the guy who played him on Trapper John, M.D.?" The one from M*A*S*H, not the guy from Bonanza. Wayne Rogers. Who went on to play Michael Moore. Which is less interesting than it sounds.
• This just in -- Michael Moore is fat!