UF NEWS: Simians Went Ape In The Undercity

Well there's a good way to resolve this problem: write an equally and opposing article amputation HoH succumbing to the oppression and dirty playstyle that is Simians. The brave undercity townsfolk got stoned to death by the ruthless flying monkeys! Men, women and children were slaughtered by the thousands as the wicked wiz of the west Arni severely hurt their feelings and bones. Meanwhile, the phrase 'Toto, I believe we are not in Kentucky anymore' could be heard from the Undercity as a lonely woman and her dog sadly awaited their demise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudPalace

Next you will be saying you know when it is Rebecca black's birthday *gasp*

---

Naw that's on Friday

Nah, friday is for getting down

...not that I take my weekend advice from Rebecca Black...


...but it is good advice lol

the adjective 'bias' may originate from the fact that they actually did win and in minimum time. With that large number of a margin and data from only one side, the reporter will describe the winning side's epic win rather than the losing side's nice-try at defense. stop being sore

I'm actually failing to see the bias people are complaining about. Seems to me that the comments like, the alleged lapdogs of abs, were probably told to our wonderful reported here, by simians as their side of the story, it was part of their reason for wanting to war them so was included in the article.

The rest of the article seemed fine to me with jokes made at the expense of both sides, the tone of the article was one of merriment and thats all I see in the structure and wording,

If you look carefully theres a small insult at simians not being very smart...sure it was a joke, but its still derogatory towards them in the same way a joke or two about the undercity may have been. And if the undercity had provided any information, imagine what the article might have looked like.

It would still have been packed with good humour but we'd have had more information about what went on in the mind sof the undercity, and FFW would have been able to make some pleasant remarks about what they did to simians on their behalf.

However simians clearly didn;t feel much heat from their enemies so felt no need to report any such events to FFW. If you don;t provide any information for a war article then no mtter what happens some people might view it as biased, but its not the reporters fault.

An example of real reporters bias - Simians came into this war in such a strong position (due to being epically awesome) that it is clear to this reporter that no matter what undercity would have tried they would have had monkey poo all over their faces

*hands TitanReborn a banana*

:cool:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias

<removed>

PS: i love you jamaica that was funny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fear9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias

<removed>

PS: i love you jamaica that was funny

---

Either you are from Undercity, then its your own fault the article is one sided.
Or you aren't from Undercity, then why do you care so much when they obviously don't.

Either way, DUH:D

I imagine the convo went like this:
FFW: So tell me about the war.
Sims: Well we caught them in dice mode and started attacking, then we warred.
FFW: I see. And what gave you the win?
Sims: We slaughtered them with MS, fb, NS, LL etc. and were super active and coordinated with attacks, but all they seemed to do was prop which didn't seem to hurt us at all. Then we switched to max gains.

From this info, I dare you to write an article which shows both sides were accurately reported.

I don't think there should be articles if one side declines to cooperate. Kingdoms may not to want publicity for various reasons.

If one side gives me their paper I can pull alot of information out of it and produce a decent unbias article
you guys don't see all the extra adjectives he put in there that were unnecessary?
He complimented the simians over and over.

I am not a province in undercity.. i just appreciate the good quality articles that I've been reading in these forums until now,
and I spoke my mind.. and other people agree with me.

Let's look at all the unnecessary words used in this section (in italics):

Quote:

---

they quickly put a new Ruby Dragon egg into their Dragon Egg Incubator 2012 and launched it with great haste. Due to this swift arrival of this new dragon, the denizens of The Undercity were too terrified as they thought that the first Ruby Dragon had awoken from the dead like an undying monster and failed to slay this beast. Despite having the intelligence level of apes the Simians rained fireballs, meteor showers, storms and chastity like wise Archmages

---

and it goes on. In my opinion, 90% of those extra words don't compliment Simians, they are just this reporter trying to spice things up. He could have just written, "Another ruby was sent by Simians that wasn't slain by Undercity. FB, MS, storms, and chastity were used by Simians which they thought helped them win the war," but he didn't want it to be boring so he added extras. Simians won and they provided the details, so of course it's going to seem biased. If you read a newspaper article about a football team, and the only thing the reporter knew about it was what one player from the winning team told him, I'm sure people would think that article was biased. Give the reporter a break. I sure had fun reading it even though I'm not a Simians fan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lastunicorn

Let's look at all the unnecessary words used in this section (in italics):

---

why are you looking at one section when we are referring to the entire article?

gg no re

fear give it a rest wtf..... go read a different article then

Fear9, over the ages we probably had 50 war articles up. Counting AR, Utimes, Temple and now these forums.
We had our fair share of wierd, inaccurate and biased articles. There was even wars where the reporters did not try very hard to find us and posted articles up without us even able to provide info. We had our fair share of people badmouthing us after bad articles. I prefer if the article is made in a way like LastUnicorn posted. It provides accurate info about the war. There is no real need for stories. I want to see strategy.

But what i am trying to say is that this was only one article. It might be biased since HoH did not provide info. We been there also. It does not work like that if you want to have an unbiased article you better have someone talk to the reps