Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Am Deleting the Blog

slatestarcodex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 1001 posts

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#161

Post by Lio »

zoul wrote: post #106
Uhrheber wrote: post #75

I stopped trusting reporters about 35 years ago, when I personally witnessed an occurrence, where a reporter was at the scene, and later read what he had written about it in the newspaper. It had practically nothing to do with what really happened, but was written in a way that most of their readers would most likely expect and endorse. I was still very young then, but it opened my eyes, and from then on, I mostly st…

That was bad journalism. Would you also stop trusting all doctors after meeting a bad one?

Would you trust a hospital with a reputation for employing doctors that never get pulled up or fired for their bad work?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#162

Post by zkid18 »

brnt wrote: post #126
Uhrheber wrote: post #75

I stopped trusting reporters about 35 years ago, when I personally witnessed an occurrence, where a reporter was at the scene, and later read what he had written about it in the newspaper. It had practically nothing to do with what really happened, but was written in a way that most of their readers would most likely expect and endorse. I was still very young then, but it opened my eyes, and from then on, I mostly st…

Disengaging based on an N=1 is not the type of individual action that improves our society. Our society is built on individual (and collective) attempts to improve, and you putting your money towards journalists you found to be doing a good job is the way we leave the world better than we found it. I hope you'll consider this, because our society cannot function without quality investigative reporting. I of course ag…

Also stopped reading any news and reports from big media about 3 years ago.

Just curious are there any independent investigation journalists that work on the patreon/subscription model? Would consider donation them rather than NYT or WSJ.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#163

Post by stjohnswarts »

himinlomax wrote: post #100
perditus wrote: post #2

This was in a piece specifically about the blog that was going to be positive, which makes this all the more inexplicable.

Journalists obviously never tell their subject their piece is going to be negative. In fact, as far as I can tell from the few people I know who have been in that situation, they appear to routinely say the opposite.

No doubt, it would be just as interesting of an article without his real name.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#164

Post by luckylion »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #107
chillacy wrote: post #14

This is a tragedy, Scott Alexander is such a thoughtful writer. I wish journalists would come up with some professional standards and make the title licensed, like doctor or lawyer. Right now we all recognize how important journalism is but journalists themselves run the gamut from ethical investigative journalists to clickbait manufacturers. Imagine if journalists also had to adhere to the equivalent of attorney cli…

There is already a sort-of licence. Being employed by a company as a journalist, especially if the company is a recognised media "name". But the people this is deliberately not recognising is bloggers. And to be honest, I'm seeing better journalism being done by (some) bloggers than (some) paid journalists now (not their fault - the business model for journalism is a mess, while the model for blogging is working).

> There is already a sort-of licence. Being employed by a company as a journalist, especially if the company is a recognised media "name".

But this obviously fails as seen in this instance (and many others). Companies have interests that do not align with the public's interest of ethical standards. Much like we've generally understood (but unfortunately not really everywhere) that letting other industries regulate themselves isn't a good idea, I don't think it's any different in the media.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#165

Post by pritovido »

jwilber wrote: post #128

I’ve seen a lot of criticism for the NYT as of late, and, sadly, it’s almost all been warranted upon inspection. I’m not sure if it’s a case of the top dog getting all the scrutiny, but it’s crazy to me how a company with so many good journalists can seem to have so many bad. Much criticism is not even new (Manufactured Consent, Judith Miller).

The problem is in who owns the mass media.

Newspapers are bankrupt, specially the NYT,that earns more money in real state(newspapers own properties in the center of cities that are very expensive) than with journalism.

Newspapers gold days are long gone.

So when someone buys it, it is not for making good journalism but for buying a propaganda channel for the owner's own interest.

The good journalist do not matter, if they say anything that the owner does not approve they are instantly fired. So they auto censor themselves.

Journalist are people too, they have families that need shelter and food. Being independent usually means almost starving. Young idealistic single people usually do that until they pick the comfortable alternative.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#166

Post by stjohnswarts »

im3w1l wrote: post #17
perditus wrote: post #2

This was in a piece specifically about the blog that was going to be positive, which makes this all the more inexplicable.

Can such assurances really be trusted?

No. There is a slightly higher chance with NYT than say TMZ but still. I've read many people saying the journalist told them it was for a fluff piece or positive article.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#167

Post by stevenjohns »

cameldrv wrote: post #124
Havoc wrote: post #85

Amateur hour over at NYT. What happened to the whole protect your source journalism ethos there?

The NYT's institutional values died when A.G. Sulzberger became publisher at the beginning of 2018.

In 2015 their columnists were arguing for arming ISIS as a ‘homegrown Sunni resistance’ and the “last Sunni bulwark” against Iran[0]. That’s in the print edition too.

It’s not like their ethos were suddenly made worse in 2018 with Sulzberger.

As a bonus, that same columnist argued for arming a Kurdish-Shiite anti-Sunni militia in 2005 and fawning over a civil war.

He’s got three Pulitzer Prizes.

The cream of the crop.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/go-ahead-ruin-my-...

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#169

Post by beshrkayali »

zkid18 wrote: post #162
brnt wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disengaging based on an N=1 is not the type of individual action that improves our society. Our society is built on individual (and collective) attempts to improve, and you putting your money towards journalists you found to be doing a good job is the way we leave the world better than we found it. I hope you'll consider this, because our society cannot function without quality investigative reporting. I of course ag…

Also stopped reading any news and reports from big media about 3 years ago. Just curious are there any independent investigation journalists that work on the patreon/subscription model? Would consider donation them rather than NYT or WSJ.

Exactly. The main problem is MSM with corporate money behind it. Getting things wrong is normal, getting things wrong intentionally (or recklessly) is malicious.

There are many. But they're difficult to find and get into. My favorite is http://www.noagendashow.com/.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#170

Post by thinkingemote »

It doesn't take too much imagination to see how easy it would be to write a hit piece.

Scott writes eloquently and in depth, but the news is not about either of those things. Scott has written a few times about problematic issues which have surfaced in recent months and it would be very easy to write "some people say that Scott is ${label}" with just a bit of superficial quotes. Today's climate of online mob justice in partnership with click bait news would not go well for Scott at all.

Post reply on HN