It journalists were capable of objective reasoning they would’ve gone into tech instead.
Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
31–40 of 88 posts
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#32When was the last time you read a news article about a topic where you are an expert, and walked away from it thinking that it would help laymen better understand the topic? Journalism is a bit of a personal frustration of mine. It's so important to the function of our society to have an informed population, but we don't, and it's because of the consistent lying that is done by journalists that we don't. Maybe not so…
> It's so important to the function of our society to have an informed population, but we don't, and it's because of the consistent lying that is done by journalists that we don't.
Are you sure it's that important to have an informed citizenry? I'd say we've never had one, anywhere. We've had some people being informed, sure, but the masses have never been informed well. They've been lead and entertained. If it's that important, how have we made it this far?
What's more important for a nation than the media informing people is the media being on the same page and projecting a similar image. Of course, you want them to not report that aliens have landed when they haven't, but you certainly don't want only half of them reporting it. I don't believe that the facts really matter that much overall. But if you lose the "shared reality", you're losing cohesion.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#33Ah. The journalists and reporters. Of course. Much concern. Never a mention of the owners, publishers, editors, boards, and personages of influence. Never a mention of the quid pro quo of coverage for access. We should focus all our concern on the journalists. Those dastardly story tellers using their immense power to boss around the mail clerks.
Trump mentions Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, all the time. But of course journalists themselves also have power. The power to decide what information reaches their readers, how it is presented - that is power. Not bossing around mail clerks.
But journalists do not typically have that power. What stories reach readers and how it is presented is power of the editors and board, like the parent pointed out.
If your bosses don't want a story covered (in a specific way), it's not going in the newspaper.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump mentions Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, all the time. But of course journalists themselves also have power. The power to decide what information reaches their readers, how it is presented - that is power. Not bossing around mail clerks.
Name one investigative report that was published against the wishes of the hierarchy. Whereas stories like this are innumerable: Whistleblowers punished for attempting to report unlawful rBGH in milk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre#Whistleblower_lawsui...
[deleted]
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#35Ah. The journalists and reporters. Of course. Much concern. Never a mention of the owners, publishers, editors, boards, and personages of influence. Never a mention of the quid pro quo of coverage for access. We should focus all our concern on the journalists. Those dastardly story tellers using their immense power to boss around the mail clerks.
The workers are always the easy targets.
The software engineers, the police, the journalists etc.
Meanwhile the puppeteers sit behind the curtains pulling the strings creating the system for everyone to be at each other's throats and no one even questions them.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#36Ah. The journalists and reporters. Of course. Much concern. Never a mention of the owners, publishers, editors, boards, and personages of influence. Never a mention of the quid pro quo of coverage for access. We should focus all our concern on the journalists. Those dastardly story tellers using their immense power to boss around the mail clerks.
Manufactured consent, anybody...?
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#37When was the last time you read a news article about a topic where you are an expert, and walked away from it thinking that it would help laymen better understand the topic? Journalism is a bit of a personal frustration of mine. It's so important to the function of our society to have an informed population, but we don't, and it's because of the consistent lying that is done by journalists that we don't. Maybe not so…
In other words journalism is great if it tells your preferred version of the truth and narrative. It is being disingenuous to disparage centralised journalism and at the same time complain about internet platforms with reduced gatekeeping.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump mentions Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, all the time. But of course journalists themselves also have power. The power to decide what information reaches their readers, how it is presented - that is power. Not bossing around mail clerks.
Name one investigative report that was published against the wishes of the hierarchy. Whereas stories like this are innumerable: Whistleblowers punished for attempting to report unlawful rBGH in milk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre#Whistleblower_lawsui...
Ronan Farrow’s investigation of Harvey Weinstein was nearly squashed by NBC, where he worked at the time. He had to take it to The New Yorker.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, you'll have to read two news outlets You already can read multiple outlets for different perspectives. Most people don't. Why would that change?
With the increasing polarization, there will have to be some point. For example, right now, Fox News at least mention negative news relating to the president, and the NY Times at least acknowledge Trump's existence. In the future, I predict the newspapers will be naked propagandists. If they judge that some thing someone says or does is going to be bad for their party, they will just ignore it outright or lie about i…
You're taking what the media already does for the powerful in aggregate, and predicting it will be applied to particular parties as well. I think that the dynamic is different there, and the amount of polarization in the media will depend strongly on the polarization between the parties.
If the democrats and republicans will start getting along better, you'll start seeing more balanced news. Otherwise, we may well see what you're describing.
Re: Journalists aren’t the enemy of the people. But we’re not your friends either
#40When was the last time you read a news article about a topic where you are an expert, and walked away from it thinking that it would help laymen better understand the topic? Journalism is a bit of a personal frustration of mine. It's so important to the function of our society to have an informed population, but we don't, and it's because of the consistent lying that is done by journalists that we don't. Maybe not so…
> It's so important to the function of our society to have an informed population, but we don't, and it's because of the consistent lying that is done by journalists that we don't. Are you sure it's that important to have an informed citizenry? I'd say we've never had one, anywhere. We've had some people being informed, sure, but the masses have never been informed well. They've been lead and entertained. If it's tha…
So what you're saying is you think 1984 is the ideal outcome?