This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
Or it could be because:
(1) she herself says it will take a lot more research before the microbes can be utilized to make an impact on plastic garbage;
(2) her research and discovery was done in 2018 and not 2019 when Thumberg was named Times Person of the Year;
(3) the criteria for Times Person of the Year is someone who most impacted the news in that year; and
(4) she was never nominated for consideration, largely because of reasons 1-3.
(1) she herself says it will take a lot more research before the microbes can be utilized to make an impact on plastic garbage;
(2) her research and discovery was done in 2018 and not 2019 when Thumberg was named Times Person of the Year;
(3) the criteria for Times Person of the Year is someone who most impacted the news in that year; and
(4) she was never nominated for consideration, largely because of reasons 1-3.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
You’re on to something there. However, the science she is working on is world changing. I don’t know why it hasn’t gotten a ton of publicity. @dancingtongue
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@jackjjackson Have you noticed how popular actual science, particularly by college students, is these days in certain quarters?
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
No. Bill Nye the science guy needs to expose this. The public might take him seriously. @dancingtongue
HankHill · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue It's too bad the News Networks no longer run how they used to run in the past. The News networks used to be about spreading the News regardless of how bad or good it made someone or something look and from my understanding they didn't make any money. Nowadays News Networks care more about making money. What's making money these days? Just watch any of the mainstream news networks and you'll see for yourself.
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@HankHill Absolutely true. You can thank the politicians -- both parties -- for forcing the FCC to abandon its Fairness doctrine of providing equal time, separating news operations from entertainment operations, and carrying a certain amount of local news in order to keep their licenses. You will notice you don't see as many PSAs (Public Service Announcements) anymore either. 60 Minutes showed that broadcast news could be a big money maker if packaged as entertainment with little concern for objectivity or balance. And Mike Wallace thought it was a badge of honor that they were the first broadcast news program to be profitable! It spelled the end of news as news over the air.
And print news has been done in by both broadcast news and social media, and now streaming. There are only a handful -- if that many -- publications with sufficient subscriber bases and advertising revenues to maintain large reporting staffs. Instead of having specialized reporters assigned to specific segments of the economy, politics, world, who become knowledgeable on their areas of responsibilities, build up trusted contacts in those areas, and have the time to thoroughly research and vet their stories, you have a bunch of journalists all racing against the clock for "breaking" and "trending" rehashs to compete against what is being given away on broadcast and social media.
And print news has been done in by both broadcast news and social media, and now streaming. There are only a handful -- if that many -- publications with sufficient subscriber bases and advertising revenues to maintain large reporting staffs. Instead of having specialized reporters assigned to specific segments of the economy, politics, world, who become knowledgeable on their areas of responsibilities, build up trusted contacts in those areas, and have the time to thoroughly research and vet their stories, you have a bunch of journalists all racing against the clock for "breaking" and "trending" rehashs to compete against what is being given away on broadcast and social media.