Nicholas Meyer Discusses Discovery

[ELURIA]

This is just the reality. It was picked up and spread by the haters, and used most heavily by them. We all know it is not STD it does not match the pattern used in any Trek show, ever. If you do not wish to be lumped in with the others, maybe you should stop using a term they spread because of its derogatory nature.

...oh, I see now. I'M responsible for how YOU think of others.

Sure, one could use this new info to no longer automatically assume negatively but why bother with nuance, when it's so much easier to tell others THEY should change their behaviour.

That makes perfect sense. Well, I'm sure I'll stop using "STD" any day now because I sure as hell don't want to cause some type of difference of opinion with my preferred usage of acronyms

 

[ELURIA]

That's not at all what irks me. Criticism is very different from fabricating lies and passing it off as news.

One is a perfectly normal, human reaction. The other is irresponsible and intentionally misleading.

And yet, Midnight's Edge are critical of STD because of their perceived lack of quality in the show's approach and praise previous Trek shows and movies they do like.

From what I can tell and I can't keep track of every single YouTube video they (or Doomcock or Egotastic FunTime or whomever by this point) release, but I keep hearing these types say to the viewers to take what they're about to report on with a grain of salt. Maybe I'm about to stumble across a dozen videos by them in which they state outright lies as fact, but sofar, purely based on that which I've listened to, they're no irresponsible Faux News/Infowars types

 

[Lord Garth]

They don't seem to be like Info Wars. After listening to the entire Midnight's Edge podcast, I was mistaken. Alex Jones is one of a kind. But they have a particular slant to push. Just like FOX News. And, frankly, just like CNN and MSNBC.

Egotastic FunTime is just goofy. He seems harmless.

 

[Tuskin38]

And yet, Midnight's Edge are critical of STD because of their perceived lack of quality in the show's approach and praise previous Trek shows and movies they do like.

People aren't against ME because they dislike DSC, people are against them because time and time again they've lied about the show. Made claims they later turned out to be false. Used unreliable sources.

They report on every piece of possible negative news about DSC/CBS without bothering to fact check themselves.

 

[Mudd]

To suggest people who criticise Star Trek are somehow "irresponsible" is nonsense

Exactly so.

 

[Spaceship Jo]

Speaking as someone utterly underwhelmed by Discovery, I still recognize that ME is awful. Anyone who peddles in the notions malice one day and then incompetence the next is full of it. Yes, you can have both going on, but DSC isn't "failing" because of some secret agenda to ruin Trek, nor is it "failing" because these creators have no idea what they are doing (at least, not any more so than any other Trek creators). DSC isn't failing in any real tangible way at all, except in pleasing all people all the time, which would be silly anyway.

 

[StarTrek1701]

Didn't ME also say the cast of the Kelvin Timeline are abandoning it?

 

[F. King Daniel]

Didn't ME also say the cast of the Kelvin Timeline are abandoning it?

I am not sure what ME claim, but Chris Pine and Chris Hemmsworth signed contracts in 2016 or before guaranteeing them X amount of money, but Paramount tried to renegotiate lesser fees for them in 2018 and they refused. The movie had the cast, locations, director and script.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

They don't seem to be like Info Wars. After listening to the entire Midnight's Edge podcast, I was mistaken. Alex Jones is one of a kind. But they have a particular slant to push. Just like FOX News. And, frankly, just like CNN and MSNBC...

/My sort-of-OT rant:
I'd put MSNBC and FOX news on the same boat; they are two of the same.

Sure -- I realize that MSNBC and FOX have totally different ideologies, but they both use the same intellectually dishonest tactics to spin their content. Same coin/different sides; both weasels.
/end rant.

As you say, it's similar with Midnight's Edge. ME does seem to have an agenda to subtly (and not-so-subtly) criticize almost every Trek that does not fit their narrow opinion of what Trek should be. And it IS an opinion, which is fine. People are allowed to use subjective opinion to criticize...

....However, they treat their subjective opinions as if they are hard objective facts. And they do so through intellectually dishonest tactics.

Case-in-point (as was already mentioned here) was the leading question they asked Mr. Meyer regarding the use of colorful language in DSC relative to ST-IV's assertion that colorful language has been done away with by the 23rd century. Meyer was clever enough to answer the question without following the lead.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

/My sort-of-OT rant:
I'd put MSNBC and FOX news on the same boat; they are two of the same.

Sure -- I realize that MSNBC and FOX have totally different ideologies, but they both use the same intellectually dishonest tactics to spin their content. Same coin/different sides; both weasels.
/end rant.

/My sort-of-OT rant:
MarketWatch disagrees in their ranking of news source bias.

In their analysis, FOX NEWS is substantially more biased than MSNBC. FOX is right on the border between unfair interpretation of the news and nonsense damaging to public discourse, slightly worse than the New York Post. On the other hand, MSNBC is still inside the zone of fair interpretation, but approaching unfair, only a little bit better than The Washington Times and, for that matter, CNN.

To get actual news, you need to turn to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc. Those sorts of guys; AP and Reuters are on top.

Seems about right.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/h...robably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28
/end rant.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

/My sort-of-OT rant:
MarketWatch disagrees in their ranking of news source bias.

In their analysis, FOX NEWS is substantially more biased than MSNBC. FOX is right on the border between unfair interpretation of the news and nonsense damaging to public discourse, slightly worse than the New York Post. On the other hand, MSNBC is still inside the zone of fair interpretation, but approaching unfair, only a little bit better than The Washington Times and, for that matter, CNN.

To get actual news, you need to turn to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc. Those sorts of guys; AP and Reuters are on top.

Seems about right.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/h...robably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28
/end rant.

I think there is a difference between MSNBC News and their evening show commentators (such as Chris Hayes and Rachael Maddow). Their actual news might be balanced, but not so much their editorializing/spinning commentators. Even Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell (both of whom I have some respect for) sometimes can't help but spin a fact to fit a certain MSNBC-wide "narrative-of-the-day".

FOX is worse in that both their news and their evening show commentators seem to spin facts in order to editorialize in a way to fit their ideology. And everyday on FOX seems to have a "narrative-of-the-day".

All I know is that it's tough for a moderate (but socially liberal-leaning) like me not to be frustrated by both FOX and MSNBC when I can see obvious spin.

Back on topic:
That's how I feel about Midnight's Edge. They do present their information in the form of first presenting a fact that we all agree is true, but then spin that fact in such a way to provide alleged back-up in criticizing whatever it is they wish to criticize.

 

[Armus]

/My sort-of-OT rant:
MarketWatch disagrees in their ranking of news source bias.

In their analysis, FOX NEWS is substantially more biased than MSNBC. FOX is right on the border between unfair interpretation of the news and nonsense damaging to public discourse, slightly worse than the New York Post. On the other hand, MSNBC is still inside the zone of fair interpretation, but approaching unfair, only a little bit better than The Washington Times and, for that matter, CNN.

To get actual news, you need to turn to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc. Those sorts of guys; AP and Reuters are on top.

Seems about right.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/h...robably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28
/end rant.

www.newsmax.com
Independent. American.

 

[Ovation]

www.newsmax.com
Independent. American.

And full of shit.

 

[DaveyNY]

I'm all for being fair, but when nines time out of ten they are just whipping stuff out of their butts to get clicks/views, they lose any credibility I'm willing to grant them.

 

[Rahul]

/My sort-of-OT rant:
I'd put MSNBC and FOX news on the same boat; they are two of the same.

Sure -- I realize that MSNBC and FOX have totally different ideologies, but they both use the same intellectually dishonest tactics to spin their content. Same coin/different sides; both weasels.
/end rant.

www.newsmax.com
Independent. American.

Can we NOT do this here?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

And full of shit.

Very much so.

 

[Mudd]

www.newsmax.com
Independent. American.

And complete bullshit.

 

[cultcross]

Can we NOT do this here?

This. This is the Discovery forum, folks. Let's discuss Discovery.

 

[Admiral Bear]

Back to the question ME asked Meyer about "colourful metaphors" and their assertion that swearing would've been eradicated by the 23rd/24th century, I seem to recall that in the early days of TNG, Picard swore in French, so there's definitely still the knowledge of the language in that time period, even if it's not regularly used. Also Data swore in Generations.

I agree it was a leading question that ME asked, a question designed to attack Discovery. It needs to be pointed out to ME that Discovery didn't fail because it had a few naughty words in it. It failed because it was unwatchable rot, that may or not have become half watchable (I've not watched past ep4, so I don't know) long after most fans had abandoned it. ME would be better off attaching itself to that train of thought instead of making up shit, when the real shit is there front and centre, ready to be critiqued.

Doomcock is a fool who does him/her self no favours at all by spouting lies, and the deleting his videos when his lies are pointed out to him, even by STD haters. I did this to him last week. He's also damn hard to listen to. He's just spouts Bob Pike's facebook posts.

 

[Tuskin38]

Back to the question ME asked Meyer about "colourful metaphors" and their assertion that swearing would've been eradicated by the 23rd/24th century, I seem to recall that in the early days of TNG, Picard swore in French, so there's definitely still the knowledge of the language in that time period, even if it's not regularly used. Also Data swore in Generations.

I agree it was a leading question that ME asked, a question designed to attack Discovery. It needs to be pointed out to ME that Discovery didn't fail because it had a few naughty words in it. It failed because it was unwatchable rot, that may or not have become half watchable (I've not watched past ep4, so I don't know) long after most fans had abandoned it. ME would be better off attaching itself to that train of thought instead of making up shit, when the real shit is there front and centre, ready to be critiqued.

Doomcock is a fool who does him/her self no favours at all by spouting lies, and the deleting his videos when his lies are pointed out to him, even by STD haters. I did this to him last week. He's also damn hard to listen to. He's just spouts Bob Pike's facebook posts.

DSC hasn't failed at all