Search

Trinity recorded that a map was created of the places with the most recipients of social assistance, describing the people derogatorily as less intelligent. She added that it seemed sad to her that Nika and Jenul could manipulate people, and she complained that clearly some were unable to read seven pages. #socialnaOmrežja #manipulacija #neumnost (translated)

Ajda Medja wrote that Sunday will be sad for the leftists, as they are expected to lose four ideological referendums. She specifically highlighted the referendum on the so-called political police as particularly painful, claiming that it is intended for monitoring and imprisoning leftists. She added that, in her opinion, everyone is in favor of it and called for a four-fold vote in favor. https://t.co/YnwH5zDqL2 #referendum #politika #Slovenija (translated)

Jože Možina wrote that he refused to grant clemency to Rosvita Pesek and expected professional responsibility from her. He claimed that RTV Slovenia did not report impartially during the four years of litigation in the dispute between him and Svetlana Makarovič, and that the segment in the show Odmevi omitted his key arguments and recorded statement. Možina stated that the public was presented with a distorted image of the reasons for his lawsuit, as specific insults that are the subject of the dispute were not mentioned, in his words. He added that the events were accurately reported by other media, including POP TV, Siol, Domovina, Planet TV, Info360, Nova24, N1, Slovenske novice, and Delo. He also referred to the position of the Association of Journalists and Publicists. He criticized the response of the host of Odmevi, Rosvita Pesek, and editor of the show, Aleš Malerič, and assessed that a correction and an apology would be appropriate. He emphasized that he is seeking judicial protection to defend his good name, the freedom of the journalistic profession, and the culture of communication. #Novinarstvo #Mediji #Slovenija (translated)

Rok Ravnikar accused RTV Slovenia of not fulfilling its mission of balanced reporting and presenting different views. He wrote that more than which side it supports, he is concerned about the loss of space for the exchange of opinions and confrontation in a democratic republic. He compared two television debates. Last November, during the referendum on euthanasia, he participated in a debate where, according to him, the time was evenly divided between supporters and opponents. There were supposed to be considerably more opponents, so each was given about 45 seconds, while supporters had two minutes each. In a debate about one of the four current referendums, they announced that each participant would get 40 seconds. Ravnikar asked why RTV Slovenia changed the criteria for time distribution, as the same time for each side and the same time for each speaker with a different number of participants would mean a different ratio between the sides. He added that as an active citizen, he expects a response from the journalistic, media, and legal professions. In this context, he cited the stance of Levitsky and Ziblatt from the book *How Democracies Die?*, that changing the rules to one's own benefit and to the detriment of opponents is characteristic of authoritarian regimes. #mediji #demokracija #poročašnje (translated)

More than 2000 words blame how the public @rtvslo does not fulfill its mission of balanced reporting and presenting different views. You cannot make a bigger anti-ad. And it is the least important which side I support - what worries and saddens me the most is that as a democratic republic we are losing the space for exchange and confrontation. Why do you think of the "others" as so stupid? When did the attitude towards the "others" change so much? Yes, I ask you, who prepare the program. I understand, you have your own agenda and your own views, but in a democratic community mutual respect is a fundamental value. Twenty years ago, I worked as a PR person in politics. Even then, we knew who belonged where and which uncle from the background had more influence. But I felt that those of us on the ground, who were in direct contact – journalists, editors, and PR people – respected each other on a professional level. When I participated in a debate last November about the referendum on euthanasia, the time was evenly divided between the "FOR" side and the "AGAINST" side. There were significantly more opponents at that time, so each of us got, if I remember correctly, 45 seconds. Most barely managed to present one thought. On the other side, the supporters had two minutes. There were also some pretty bizarre embarrassments, as some could not come up with enough arguments for a two-minute speech. Last night, I heard an introductory announcement at a debate about one of the four current referendums that each speaker would get 40 seconds. Seriously? So back then equal time for both sides, now equal time for each speaker. These are different criteria, which with a different number of participants also mean a different distribution of time between both sides. Why did you change the criterion? I am just an active citizen, I expect that the journalistic, media, and legal professions will provide their criticism and assessment. "Changing the rules to your advantage and adjusting the conditions to the detriment of opponents is one of the basic characteristics of authoritarian powers." (Levitsky & Ziblatt: How democracies die?) #demokracija #mediji #poročanje (translated)

Yes. For me, who comes from the left center, it is also a sad fact that all opinion leaders of the "left" and journalists, who also rank on the left, hide in silence when something much less offensive is said by @ZanMahnic, while everyone screams until exhaustion. #bljak (translated)

A fable about a dog and hay The dog climbed into the manger, full of fresh hay, and fell asleep there. After a while, tired and hungry oxen came to the barn, wanting to feed themselves after a long day of work. As they approached the manger, the dog jumped up, started barking furiously and snapping its teeth to drive them away. One of the oxen looked at him sadly and said: "What a selfish animal! You can't eat the hay yourself, and you won't let us, who are hungry and depend on it, near it." a classic Aesop's fable Any similarity to Tina, Tereza, Nataša, Vladimir, and Asta is purely coincidental. #bazen #pametnezgodbe #učnezgodbe (translated)

Stovka izraelských teroristů v noci zaútočila na palestinskou vesnici Džalúd na Západním břehu. IDF se nedokázala zkoordinovat se službou Šin bet a pohraniční policií a na místo dorazila v žalostně malém počtu. Osadnické povstání nízké inenzity se nekontrolovaně šíří. #Izrael #Palestina #ozbrojenýkonflikt #IL #PS

Na neki način se mi mlade marčevke smilijo. Ne zato, ker jih Gaza prizadene. Prizadane vsakega. Žalostno je nekaj drugega: da je tragedija na drugem koncu sveta postala tako velik del njihovega čustvenega življenja. Heideggerjev Dasein pomeni človeka, ki je vržen v neki konkretni svet: v ta kraj, ta čas, med te ljudi, v odnose, dolžnosti, ljubezni, težave in odgovornosti, ki so osebno njegove tukaj in zdaj. Bivati pomeni najprej biti tukaj. Da sein. Zato je nekaj bolezenskega v življenju, ki najmočnejša čustva črpa iz dogodkov, oddaljenih tisoče kilometrov, medtem ko neposredni svet postaja zgolj kulisa. Skrbeti za oddaljeno trpljenje je človeško. Ne sme pa oddaljena tragedija postati resničnejša od ljudi za sosednjimi vrati. Morda ves ta jok, stok in škripanje z zobmi kaže na odsotnost pristnega sveta, ki bi bil zares njihov: na odsotnost odnosov, obveznosti, tveganj in smisla, zaradi katerih bi bilo njihovo lastno življenje dovolj polno, da bi zahtevalo polno pridotnost. Heidegger bi morda rekel, da vprašanje ni samo, za kaj jim je mar, ampak ali v svetu, v katerega so bile vržene, sploh zares prebivajo. Skratka, punce, s kakšnim delom bi se kazalo zamotit. #človečnost #tragedija #odnosi

V zadnjih 15 letih je Evropa zaprla 35 rafinerij in izgubila 20% rafinerijskih kapacitet. Medtem pa je surove nafte na trgu dovolj. Kriza dizla tako ni stvar Izraela in napada na Iran. To je stvar zabitih levičarjev in njihove "zelene" proti znanstvene agende. In enako z nuklearkami. Kako dolgo bo Evropa še nasedla? #Evropa #rafinerije #žalostnaresnica