Forbes: The Celtic Comeback? Don't Believe the Hype [Mod warning post #71]

thebman

Seems fairly accurate TBH.

Now it is easy to dismiss some of it as he inherited this mess but equally hard to cut the government some slack when they are engaging in what can only be described as dodgy behavior in the Reilly scandal at the moment.

The Times article read like a publicity piece TBH. Maybe they were stuck for a headline or FG just paid for a party political broadcast in it.

More than likely Enda wouldn't agree to do it if it was going to be a real hard hitting political interview.

However I find it hard to believe things aren't getting better at the moment. By better I mean that we are bouncing along the bottom not that we are going to grow at regular 4-5% and our debt is sustainable all of a sudden like the government would like us to believe.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/karlwhelan/2012/10/07/the-celtic-comeback-dont-believe-the-hype/

syklops

I have to say what hype? Everytime you turn on the radio or television or open Irish print media, its nothing but doom and gloom. He references one Times article with the Taoiseach saying things are improving which I think they slowly are.

Who is his article aimed at exactly?

Cork boy 55

It seems there has been a very negative reaction this TIME piece
But the thing is the article is behind a paywall
so the only people who have read are people that brought TIME
or have a TIME subscription that's about less than 1% of the population
so all these thousands of tweets,posts, articles, blogs and so on
are just about the cover and not what inside.
I noticed that even the Irish media pieces on the TIME cover don't appear to have read the actual article.

even Karl Whelan in forbes admits that he has not read it LOL
It like writing a book review going by the cover and the back page.

Karl whelan wrote:

The article itself is behind a paywall but Time’s background story gives the general idea

No it does not Karl, buy the ****ing mag and read it and review or shut up.

I have not read it I assume(LOL) the article takes a more tempered tone than the cover and is full of the relevant facts and figures
Often headlines are slightly misleading or attention grapping in order
to get people to buy it.

Sand

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

even Karl Whelan in forbes admits that he has not read it LOL
It like writing a book review going by the cover and the back page.



No it does not Karl, buy the ****ing mag and read it and review or shut up.

I have not read it I assume(LOL) the article takes a more tempered tone than the cover and is full of the relevant facts and figures
Often headlines are slightly misleading or attention grapping in order
to get people to buy it.

Where does Karl Whelan say he hasn't read it? He notes its behind a paywall and offers the alternative of the Time background article for those seeking to get the essentials of the Time story. He never says "I didn't bother reading it"

Karl Whelans point is correct: things are worse than when Kenny took over, and they are getting worse, faster. Much (though not the majority) of this actually *is* Kenny's fault because his government inherited a flawed, clearly failed strategy that they derided in opposition and they have simply picked up where their predecessors left off in following a flawed and clearly failed strategy. He could have tried a different tack and at least failed trying something new - instead he decided to fail by pursuing an already doomed plan.

syklops

Sand wrote: »

Karl Whelans point is correct: things are worse than when Kenny took over, and they are getting worse, faster. Much (though not the majority) of this actually *is* Kenny's fault because his government inherited a flawed, clearly failed strategy that they derided in opposition and they have simply picked up where their predecessors left off in following a flawed and clearly failed strategy. He could have tried a different tack and at least failed trying something new - instead he decided to fail by pursuing an already doomed plan.

What are these different tacks that you are talking about? And how exactly are things worse than 18 months ago?

Cork boy 55

Sand wrote: »

Where does Karl Whelan say he hasn't read it? He notes its behind a paywall and offers the alternative of the Time background article for those seeking to get the essentials of the Time story. He never says "I didn't bother reading it"

Karl Whelans point is correct: things are worse than when Kenny took over, and they are getting worse, faster. Much (though not the majority) of this actually *is* Kenny's fault because his government inherited a flawed, clearly failed strategy that they derided in opposition and they have simply picked up where their predecessors left off in following a flawed and clearly failed strategy. He could have tried a different tack and at least failed trying something new - instead he decided to fail by pursuing an already doomed plan.

He clearly did not read it IMO, he does not quote it and he adds nothing new he got the "jist" of the story by reading the Q&A with the author he tells us.
His general points may well be right, that not my point, whose is right or wrong.

The point I was trying to make is there was this huge social media and media reaction to a article that >99% of people did not read
and it is possible that the article is more negative and critical than the cover pic designed merely for eye-catching and sales.

thats all peace out

Sand

@syklops

What are these different tacks that you are talking about? And how exactly are things worse than 18 months ago?

There are many sources of news media if you want to catch up on recent events.

@Cork boy 55

He clearly did not read it IMO

Maybe, but that's different to what you originally claimed - that he had admitted to not reading it. Once we're past that...well, everyone's got an opinion.

The point I was trying to make is there was this huge social media and media reaction to a article that >99% of people did not read

I think it would be fairer to say there is this huge social media and media reaction to a Time magazine cover (Enda Kenny grinning on the green themed cover of Time with the title of "The Celtic Comeback" : "[Kenny] is rebuilding his countries economy. What the rest of Europe can learn from him") that 99% of people did see.

thebman

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

He clearly did not read it IMO, he does not quote it and he adds nothing new he got the "jist" of the story by reading the Q&A with the author he tells us.
His general points may well be right, that not my point, whose is right or wrong.

The point I was trying to make is there was this huge social media and media reaction to a article that >99% of people did not read
and it is possible that the article is more negative and critical than the cover pic designed merely for eye-catching and sales.

thats all peace out

Have you watched the times Q&A with Kenny? Not one even remotely difficult question asked and not once was he pressed on a single issue.

It was a filler piece until the US elections are decided.

secman

word on the grapevine, another bad announcement in the morning...........................another nail in the coffin.

_Kaiser_

secman wrote: »

word on the grapevine, another bad announcement in the morning...........................another nail in the coffin.

Care to elaborate?

NIMAN

Which coffin?

The country's? Enda's?

secman

Just can't elaborate at the moment, think it will break by 9 o'clock tomorrow morning

NIMAN

Is it a business closure?

femur61

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

It seems there has been a very negative reaction this TIME piece


even Karl Whelan in forbes admits that he has not read it LOL
It like writing a book review going by the cover and the back page.



.

He said it is behind a paywall but he didn't say he hasn't read it.

Anyway ithe cover says enough for lots of people (except the Irish who are living here).

secman

NIMAN wrote: »

Is it a business closure?

Not a closure, but a significant scaleback, hopefully thats all.


Secman

syklops

secman wrote: »

Not a closure, but a significant scaleback, hopefully thats all.


Secman

Can you tell us now?

NIMAN

secman wrote: »

Just can't elaborate at the moment, think it will break by 9 o'clock tomorrow morning

Did I miss it?

antoobrien

NIMAN wrote: »

Did I miss it?

You might when you get home, they knocked off the analogue TV system;)

NIMAN

Seriously? I don't remember anything major in the news.

It wasn't Argos was it?

secman

Bit surprised myself, but it has not broke yet. Hopefully its still being reconsidered. For obvious reasons can't say the name, hopefully the delay is a good sign.

Secman

syklops

Thread derailed by hint of something.... bad?

See my point on page one. More doom and gloom. In this case "word on the grapevine", "according to Mary in accounts", "just heard over the wires, but can't elaborate", and we all ate it up. If Secman had said "I just heard there is going to be some good news that will be breaking shortly", we would all have been saying "yeah well I'll believe when I see it" or "define good".. The mere hint that more pain to come was all many of us needed.

A change in attitude is whats needed.