Sujet : Re: oscillator gain
De : bill.sloman (at) *nospam* ieee.org (Bill Sloman)
Groupes : sci.electronics.designDate : 21. Oct 2024, 04:28:34
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vf4hp2$pk9v$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 21/10/2024 5:38 am, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 14:06:35 -0400, Joe Gwinn wrote:
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 08:23:56 -0700, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 09:06:24 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
<snip>
The big alternative to the NYT is the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), which
has been directly criticizing the NYT for their unbalanced coverage, and
is quite useful for pointing out what has been omitted. In the old
days, the NYT would be the check on the WSJ, and so on.
The WSJ has been owned by Rupert Murdoch for a while now IIRC, so it's not
surprising they're calling out the disgraceful NYT for its biased
coverage.
Rupert Murdoch's newspapers print the propaganda of people who have enough money to bribe Rupert Murdoch.
The bias is what Rupert is selling. Essentially the WSJ is complaining that the NYT isn't printing the propaganda that the WSJ is paid to print.
With Fox News running as Donald Trump personal propaganda machine, you've got a fairly direct measure of Rupert Murdoch's journalistic integrity.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
oscillator gain
Re: oscillator gain