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

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#371

Post by jmeister »

ericzawo wrote: post #40
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…

I 100% agree and talked about this a lot in j school. Would love to see some type of society body emerge with a coalition of Pulitzer Prize winners (the only real framework that possibly stands to live past the inevitable calls about its legitimacy from the News Corp -owned bodies of media, honestly) and ideally backed by the biggest news media companies in the world. I would love to see a further membership based el…

Pulitzers have lost a lot of credibility because of Hannah Jones/1619.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#372

Post by scarmig »

simonh wrote: post #363
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…

News organisations pander to their audience, so I think it's really important to understand what that audience is. If you happen to be in that target audience, then of course there's a real risk you'll end up in an echo chamber that becomes increasingly far away from anything resembling a consensus reality. I've come up with several strategies to try and minimise this. One is to read multiple sources with different t…

Most news is worthless. What's important will have more perspective available six months from now (or, better, six years from now); what's not important is just parlor room gossip.

Reading e.g. the politics section of the NYT religiously for the past couple years, your biggest takeaway would be that Trump is an idiot who doesn't belong in office. Which, as far as it goes, is true, but there's no need to pick up a bad habit like reading the NYT in order to know that.

It's probably necessary to know enough about this week's going-ons for social reasons, to the same extent that it's necessary to know who's playing in the Super Bowl, but there are more useful ways to spend your energies.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#373

Post by rmrfstar »

stared wrote: post #353
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…

First and foremost, I hope that the journalist gets revealed and fired. NYT is a reputable journal and shouldn't tolerate such unprofessional and potentially dangerous behavior. The person breached a few lines of ethical journalism, and for no justified reason: First, purposefully using an incorrect name (and Scott Alexander's online identity is Scott Alexander). In many other cases, even if the name is known publicl…

> NYT is a reputable journal

The people who lied us into Iraq?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#374

Post by DoubleGlazing »

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…

The father of one of my neighbours recently died in a house fire. It was a tragic accident, nothing sinister. The whole family could be described as boringly average with nothing of note about them. The family refused all requests for interviews from the media.

That didn't stop the Irish Independent (big national paper here) from publishing gory headlines about the families pain. They also managed to source family photos (both old and more recent ones) and published pictures of the whole family. The family could deal with the headlines, but that someone leaked family photos to the paper really hit them hard.

The story was so sensationalised and gory and completely off the scale. A few column inches would have sufficed, instead it was double page spread implying the family was in turmoil. The paper turned an already painful family situation in to an absolute nightmare.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#375

Post by SpelingBeeChamp »

camillomiller wrote: post #326
mrweasel wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I first heard this explained by John C. Dvorak and it has terrified me ever since. Originally I just believe that journalist just had a terrible understanding of IT, but when you think about it, there's no reason why it's just IT. Why would journalist have a better understanding of medicine, politics, climate, finance or any other topic covered. Basically you're left it a situation where you can only trust highly spe…

As a journalist who's a CS dropout, then later a BoA, and who works as a web dev on the side: I agree. BUT: 1) The journalist's work is sometime a soul-crushing effort to turn complex things that can't really be made simple into a readable summary. I cover Quantum tech as someone who has at least a grasp of physics: it's insanely difficult. 2) Journalists that behave like the ones you describe, are bad for the whole…

It is not a journalist's job to be an expert in the subject they are covering. That's why journalists interview experts, and why journalists don't use themselves as sources.

If you are writing from your own knowledge rather than attributing your information to others, I would argue that you aren't really practicing journalism. (There's nothing wrong with that, I just think it's something else.)

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#376

Post by dredmorbius »

burntoutfire wrote: post #62
rtz12 wrote: post #49

This might be a controversial opinion, but I have just one word to describe most journalists nowadays: "scum". They seek exciting and sensationalist stories without regard for any consequences in the real world. They twist their stories to manipulate the readers towards their viewpoint. But worst of all, they have the gall to present themselves as the upholders of morality and the paragons of democracy. Any criticism…

There's a novel by Balzac (forgot which one), which shows the behind-the-scenes of mid-XIX century Paris journalism. It's essentially the same as you described, but also, the journalists don't flaunt their views, but rather their masters' (the owners of the papers).

The nature of news, gossip, and propaganda predates 19th century France. The Roman god Fama, attendant to Jupiter, trumpeting his words, heedless of truth or falsity:

"At the world's centre lies a place between the lands and seas and regions of the sky, the limits of the threefold universe, whence all things everywhere, however far, are scanned and watched, and every voice and word reaches its listening ears. Here Fama (Rumour) dwells her chosen home set on the highest peak constructed with a thousand apertures and countless entrances and never a door. It's open night and day and built throughout of echoing bronze; it all reverberates, repeating voices, doubling what it hears. Inside, no peace, no silence anywhere, and yet no noise, but muted murmurings like waves one hears of some far-distant sea, or like a last late rumbling thunder-roll, when Juppiter [Zeus] has made the rain-clouds crash. Crowds throng its halls, a lightweight populace that comes and goes, and rumours everywhere, thousands, false mixed with true, roam to and fro, and words flit by phrases all confused. Some pour their tattle into idle ears, some pass on what they've gathered, and as each gossip adds something new the story grows. Here is Credulitas (Credulity), here reckless Error (Error), groundless Laetitia (Delight), Susurri (Whispers) of unknown source, sudden Seditio (Sedition), overwhelming Timores (Fears). All that goes on in heaven or sea or land Fama (Rumour) observes and scours the whole wide world. Now she had brought the news [to Troy] that ships from Greece were on their way with valiant warriors: not unforeseen the hostile force appears."

-- Ovid, Metamorphoses 12. 39 ff

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#377

Post by aj3 »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #317
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…

I woke up to the fact that most newspapers are like that in the last 2-3 years. That resulted in me eliminating one publication after the other. Today only one has remained, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, a german-language publication from Switzerland. Lets see how long it holds up.

But living in a bubble doesn't sound that great either. I prefer the Economist - they clearly have a very strong bias in some political & economical stories, but that bias is predictable and consistent. At least their factual reporting seems on the point.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#378

Post by gridlockd »

simonh wrote: post #363
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…

News organisations pander to their audience, so I think it's really important to understand what that audience is. If you happen to be in that target audience, then of course there's a real risk you'll end up in an echo chamber that becomes increasingly far away from anything resembling a consensus reality. I've come up with several strategies to try and minimise this. One is to read multiple sources with different t…

One underrated option is to just not read the news:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/apr/12/news-is-bad-ro...

Getting the news from "both sides" is just getting two bullshit spins on the same topic, but the truth isn't in the middle.

You can get "just the facts" from outlets like Reuters. You may find that this isn't really entertaining and that really you do consume news for other reasons than getting informed. You may recognize that you actually want "the spin", you want the emotional turmoil, the sensation.

From that perspective, consuming news is more like a consuming a drug: A guilty pleasure that should not be overindulged in.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#379

Post by nvr219 »

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…

How do you get the news? Who do you trust?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#380

Post by makomk »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #301
mrweasel wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I first heard this explained by John C. Dvorak and it has terrified me ever since. Originally I just believe that journalist just had a terrible understanding of IT, but when you think about it, there's no reason why it's just IT. Why would journalist have a better understanding of medicine, politics, climate, finance or any other topic covered. Basically you're left it a situation where you can only trust highly spe…

> This raises the question: Are journalists actually required? Depends. The alternative is bloggers. This situation is ugly. All sorts of motives are being tossed at the journalist, here, but it may be as simple as they think they have a “scoop,” which is pure gold, for journalists (especially young ones). That said, there are standards that journalists are supposed to meet; usually about things like the number of in…

Maybe the willingness of journalists to priotize "scoops" over the actual consequences of their reporting is exactly the problem. On some level, they seem to be incapable of thinking of non-journalists as actual, real people who deserve to be treated with decency rather than things they can use in their Very Important Work which is Vital to Democracy and then toss aside - and as you hint at, this is probably structural rather than just a failing of particular reporters.
Post reply on HN