clicky They'll prolly fix it later so I'll quote the dodgy bits.

At 5pm (AEDT), the Australian dollar was trading at $US0.93, down from yesterday's close of $US0.93.

During the domestic session, the local unit traded between $US0.93 and $US0.93.

Down ? ... between ? .... sounds massively unmovingly stable.

The biggest fall of the day came straight after the release of the Reserve Bank of Australia ...

But it didn't move ... supposedly

He said the local currency was near the bottom of its range at the moment and predicted an overnight trading range of US$9320 and US$9380

Now maybe currency traders talk in lots of $10,000 ? but the unit they were using earlier in the article was the dollar, not $10,000.

I doubt most of their readership would even notice anyhow.

who the f*** reads it is the idiot imo obes lawl

tomorrows news.com.au headline

WORLD CURRENCIES WORTHLESS - HOW IT AFFECTS YOUR FAMILY

Other newspapers/webstes headline

AUSTRALIAN DOLLAR REMAINS STEADY AGAINST GREENBACK


news.com.au is sensationalist crap drivel written by morons for morons

Or maybe the headline from abc.net.au: "THE INTERNET IS FREE!! GOOGLE MAKES BILLIONS USING MAGIC!!"

I can make it a little better like this.

At 5pm (AEDT), the Australian dollar was trading at $US0.9333, down from yesterday's close of $US0.9340.

During the domestic session, the local unit traded between $US0.9333 and $US0.9366.

zylox ams teh smarts. give him a medal

I laughed when I saw two front page news stories have 'epic' in the headline and summary. What the f***ing f***?

I laughed when I saw two front page news stories have 'epic' in the headline and summary. What the f***ing f***?

AN elderly man goes on epic nine-hour drive away from home after a suspected wrong turn.

Must be a really...

...really...

...really...

slow news day.

Just print more money.

During the domestic session, the local unit traded between $US0.93 and $US0.93.

there's minimal difference between those amounts

I laughed when I saw two front page news stories have 'epic' in the headline and summary.

"epic fail" was in a headline the other day

yep, it appears the brisbane times is written by gamers

You know, you're not supposed to have swearing in subjects, but just this once we'll make an exception - anything to improve the google search rankings for the terms 'news.com.au' and 's***' together. I'm doing my part.

In other news, I really really really really hope Murdoch puts his money where his mouth is.

Unfortunately news.com.au and "epic fail" in a Fairfax headline is a representation of the abysmal state of our written word. I've received emails (b2b) from all sorts of people in positions from an account manager through to a CEO that have decided to;

- Use 'epic fail'
- "C U" instead of see you
- "R U" instead of are you
- Spelling mistakes (hte instead of the or YOUR INSTEAD OF YOU'RE ITS f***ING YOU ARE YOU STUPID c***)
- One guy even used "owned" to describe how our phone service was disrupted because of a copper pair problem in the pit outside our office.

Talking like that on MSN or a forum on the internet is one thing but using it in business is just an epic fail

kthkbi

I read an interesting blog at the Australian the other day about this which gave me pause to think. I've always believed that all traffic isn't created equal and this guy makes an interesting point reinforcing this.

According to the figures there, advertising revenue can be 30-60x more lucrative if you sort out your demographics properly - you can make more money from less traffic. In this context the "Slashdot effect" traffic could be quite damaging..

Its possible that Murdoch isn't a lunatic?

last edited by Hogfather at 10:32:51 18/Nov/09

I thought the whole point of the internet was never to pay for anything?


any news I need to hear will be quoted into a forum thread somewhere and discussed ad nauseum by familiar faces without agendas (or at least with agendas Im already well aware of) which will give me a much more balanced viewpoint than whatever bulls*** news.com.au puts out there



last edited by maxe at 10:52:35 18/Nov/09

I don't even go to news.com.au anymore, it just s***ted me way too bad. I just hit up brisbanetimes for news which is ok.

there's minimal difference between those amounts

You'd be wrong insom, there is no difference, a minimal difference is there is a difference of no real substance. But this time there is no difference.

That is to say minimal can never mean none/lack of/non-existence as minimal by its very meaning implies some/a quantity/existence.

i like news.com and will continue to read it (and brisbane times) right up until they make me pay for it.

Talking like that on MSN or a forum on the internet is one thing but using it in business is just an epic fail

Thats rediculous. I hate ppl who try to impose there spelling nazi on me. I brought my computer from teh shop I will use it without there criticism!

"their"

Spelling mistakes (hte instead of the or YOUR INSTEAD OF YOU'RE ITS f***ING YOU ARE YOU STUPID c***)

IT'S

owned :(

haha Teacher pwnage.

Unfortunately news.com.au and "epic fail" in a Fairfax headline is a representation of the abysmal state of our written word. I've received emails (b2b) from all sorts of people in positions from an account manager through to a CEO that have decided to;

Yeah that is wrong. I might stick it to the man and learn a different language. TAKE THAT.

What cracks me up about their claim of google stealing their news is that NEWS steals other websites news all the time. By the time they pay the people they steal News from they wont have any money left to pay for any of their own journalism.

Theres a rumour that the Brittany Spears story about people leaving the Pert concert was 2nd hand news and that the journalist was never at the event.
Instead of admitting that, NEWS has decided to run with the "tell an even bigger lie to cover the first lie" technique. They've really been sinking the boot into Brittany. I hope she sues them.

When Murdoch bought WSJ, I'm sure he said he was going to un-do their subscription based service, bring it to Australia and make it free competing directly against AFR.

That was over a year ago, and I guess he now realises it's the way to go for quality journalism - that people will pay to read it.

I'm often tempted to subscribe to WSJ myself, but it's expensive and not Australian centric enough. For a while they had all their content for free on their iPhone application, and it was very refreshing to be able to read quality detailed news on world events followed up with good opinion pieces.

I think what will happen is sites like news.com.au will lose any of the serious content they have, with just enough 'news' to keep people visiting and will remain free, updating us on which celebrity twittered what, the latest popular group on Facebook and which utube videos you just have to watch today

Real journalism and more indepth articles will be fenced off from the search sites and made only available to subscribers.

They will certainly need to make significant changes to the content news.com.au currently provides to have me fork over any money - and i'm not adverse to paying for online content, having subscribed to both crikey and AFR (as well as technical magazines and totalfark) in the past.

Newspapers have to become free.
If they dont then its all over for print news.

Must be a epic slow news day.

fixed it for ya pinky
Edit:

In other news, I epic hope Murdoch puts his money where his mouth is.

Saw another abc news opportunity right there!

last edited by skythra at 14:35:18 18/Nov/09

I would pay a subscription to news.com.au for Janet Albrechsten's columns alone. Andrew Bolt is just a bonus.