MySwissAlps.com features ads, commercial and non-commercial A New York Times article about Lucerne
-
If this link opens, you’ll find a nice report from the new York Times about things to do around Lucerne.
http://www.nytimes.com/2018/0 9/18/travel/lucerne-switzerland-mountains-views-lake.html
Slowpoke
-
Hi Slowpoke,
That’s a very nice and extensive article indeed! Thanks for sharing.
Hi Slowpoke
yes, it was a nice article and I enjoyed her take on the Swiss culture as much as the attractions she visited. She reinforced my own impressions of the Swiss. We just returned from our first hiking trip of the Bavarian alps, from Berchtesgaden to Neuschwanstein and it is inevitable that I would compare the Austrian/ German alps to the Swiss alps. While the Bavarian alps are beautiful, they don’t quite have the same grandeur as B.O. does. And while the Bavarians were certainly efficient and helpful, I wouldn’t say they were overly warm or enthusiastic to foreign travelers. I know Swiss and German people are closely related in ancestry and culture but still not quite the same, at least to me.
the article did make me want to explore the Swiss cities more, of which I have little experience. Maybe when my legs get too old to hike, which is getting closer each day. Mark.
P.S. Do you , like me, find it amazing how much better the quality of reporting in the New York Times is compared to 99.9% of other American newspapers?
Enjoyed the article, Slowpoke – wetting my appetite for our visit in October!
Thanks, Slowpoke. Nice article. We will be in Lucerne at month’s end.
Kay
<<“P.S. Do you , like me, find it amazing how much better the quality of reporting in the New York Times is compared to 99.9% of other American newspapers? “>>
Hi Mark-
I am a routine reader of the New York Times, as are many in the northeastern part of the USA.
I agree that the writing is of high quality, and the articles are well written, informative, and convey the writer’s perspectives and the background facts well, on a wide range of topics. The style in which the computer loss and recovery was presented by the author in the article about Lucerne is a perfect example.
I cannot speak for 99.99 % because I have only sampled at most 2 or 3 dozen other US newspapers, many now extinct, in my lifetime. In fact, I doubt that there are 10,000 active newspapers left to read and sample, which would be required to obtain those data.
I generally share the point of view of the editors, which tends toward the liberal perspective within today’s range of available political perspectives in the USA. Unfortunately, several years ago , possibly when the rigorously neutral and objective (in his editing) Mr. Rosenthal retired as chief news editor, a deliberate change in perspective was applied to news reporting. The new chief editor has allowed hints of subjective perspectives that would have been “neutralized.” The articles not on the editorial page have developed a perspective or bias. Probably, it reflects the views of readers in the customer base. Slight though it may be, it means that I can no longer cite the Times as a neutral and informed source when I argue with my more conservative friends. So, in that regard, even thought the writing is well done, the occasional hint of the writers’ perspectives is allowed to be published. The hints of lack of objectivity, including occasional disparaging hints or comments in passing about various people or events, makes the NYT seem to be a no-longer-objective news source.
That distresses me.
Slowpoke
Hi Slowpoke
well the 99.9% figure was of course ment as a euphemism not a factually accurate statistic. Like you I have sampled a limited number newspapers, but mostly USA Today and our local Knoxville News Sentinel. Our local newspaper has gotten smaller and smaller with less and less content that is so superficial and dumbed down and simplified that it would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic.
I suppose I have gotten so used to media bias both print and broadcast and both liberal and conservative that I guess I just take that as a given now. My personal political views are a mixture and I believe I have gotten accustomed to viewing and listening to news with a degree of cynicism. Unfortunate. However I can live with that. What I cannot accept is the rancor and intolerance both sides have for those with differing opinions. Mark
Hi Mark-
<<“However I can live with that. What I cannot accept is the rancor and
intolerance both sides have for those with differing opinions.”>>
You might take a look at the Swiss political system. A series of readable books by Jonathan Steinberg ( previously at Cambridge, now at U. Penn, I believe) went a long way toward explaining how a country with roughly equal Roman Catholic and Protestant populations who speak 3 major and one minor national languages, plus a lot of Swiss German and a lot of English, can work so well.
There is plenty of arguing and disagreement, and a wide range of the political spectrum from socialist to rather conservative exits among the 5 or 6 important political parties.
( All do support a single payer health insurance system, however, and the Swiss have more effective cost control mechanisms than we do. Lots of arguments about how to fund it, of course.)
They is a wide range if income levels, too. Perhaps as wide as the USA.
But, it all works. Most probable reasons- the Swiss have figured out that they have a good thing going and would rather keep it all together than drive it apart. And, Direct Democracy allows all to have a voice that can be heard.
Our current politics remind me of the 1840’s and 1850’s. The consequences were not pleasant.
Slowpoke
- The thread ‘A New York Times article about Lucerne’ is closed to new replies.
