When did writing in major newspapers become so bad? • Hacker News Board

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#41

Post by jimbokun » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:20 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #24

Something that I think is rarely discussed when this topic comes up is the loss of prestige. Working for The New York Times or The New Yorker used to have some weight with pretty much everyone in the country. That is no longer the case. It hasn't been so for at least a couple of decades. Extremely erudite-yet-mostly-apolitical people like Lewis Lapham [1] went to literary magazines and high-end journalism a half-cent…

> I can't name a single person that I'd consider the modern equivalent of Lapham, or even Christopher Hitchens.

If this person exists today, they are much more likely to be found on Substack than at The New York Times.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#42

Post by keiferski » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:20 PM UTC

varispeed wrote: post #38

If you read how most major newspapers used to write about drugs, particularly cannabis, then you learn they have always been bad, manipulative and sleazy. They have to keep certain line of reporting to keep their licenses, but also money flowing in from interested parties, e.g. pharmaceutical industry. I don't believe there is one trustworthy outlet - it's all politics and corruption so best is read as much sources a…

Citizen Kane is an oldie but goodie on this topic.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#43

Post by cratermoon » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

mrweasel wrote: post #26

zozin wrote: post #6

"Journalism" isn't a real profession anymore. It doesn't attract writing talent, except at the margins. Why should it, journalism jobs have decreased by more than ~50% the last decade. Journalists are now just copywriters; optimizing for SEO and Google's spiders.

Journalism is expensive, so what I think may be happening is that the newspapers are no longer able to afford to fill an entire paper with the writings of actual journalists. Instead they hire "writers" and "translators" who take junk from the internet and notices from news agencies and turn it into sort of articles. Danish newspapers are filled with bad spelling and broken language. It's pretty clear that they're hi…

Newspapers used to be great for local news. But now with layoffs they barely cover the usual local beats. They fill lots of space with "local" news that is actually written off in some corporate center by a few people that do a few minutes of googling. https://newrepublic.com/article/160534/desperate-last-days-l...

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#44

Post by keiferski » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:22 PM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #41

keiferski wrote: post #24

Something that I think is rarely discussed when this topic comes up is the loss of prestige. Working for The New York Times or The New Yorker used to have some weight with pretty much everyone in the country. That is no longer the case. It hasn't been so for at least a couple of decades. Extremely erudite-yet-mostly-apolitical people like Lewis Lapham [1] went to literary magazines and high-end journalism a half-cent…

> I can't name a single person that I'd consider the modern equivalent of Lapham, or even Christopher Hitchens. If this person exists today, they are much more likely to be found on Substack than at The New York Times.

Right, but that's precisely the point: Lapham was the editor of Harper's, a top literary/news magazine, for almost 30 years. He was in an institutional position of power, not a random blogger on a new startup's site.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#45

Post by TrispusAttucks » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:23 PM UTC

This is everywhere not just major newspapers. I experience it frequently in verbal conversation.

There is solipsistic change taking place in discourse were people assume you already have their knowledge in your head.

It's to the point where I have to play 24 question and then summarize the story to include all the facts to make sure I have it correct.

Totally possible I'm the strange one and see ambiguity where others do not.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#46

Post by yoz-y » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:24 PM UTC

gambler wrote: post #12

>I think a problem is that modern newspapers cater to an audience that’s expected to be very plugged in to the cultural and political topic of the day, or at least fake it. Spot on. The point of this style of writing isn't to provide you with information about new events. The point is to provide framing/spin for people who are already familiar (albeit uperficially) with occurring events. At some point I stopped consu…

I have the same problem when talking politics with my father, or other people who follow the scene very closely. Instead of saying "the prime minister" or "the minister of education", they will use their names. Sometimes even for mayors or people who may have appeared on TV (which I don't watch) once.

Like the author I feel exhausted and always have to ask who's who and why is that important. Of course one option is to get interested in politics, but already being very bad with names and faces I feel like it's a waste of time.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#47

Post by 8ytecoder » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

A lot of publications have gone really bad in just the last few years. Back home we learnt English from newspapers. My English would be terrible if I attempt it now. British publications FT and The Economist still hold their standards high. They both have quality, well-researched content with commendable language to back it up.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#48

Post by jimbokun » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

varispeed wrote: post #38

If you read how most major newspapers used to write about drugs, particularly cannabis, then you learn they have always been bad, manipulative and sleazy. They have to keep certain line of reporting to keep their licenses, but also money flowing in from interested parties, e.g. pharmaceutical industry. I don't believe there is one trustworthy outlet - it's all politics and corruption so best is read as much sources a…

Just watched The Front Page recently, which showed that sensationalist driven journalism was alive and well in 1931:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021890/

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#49

Post by cratermoon » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

mattbk1 wrote: post #30

zozin wrote: post #6

"Journalism" isn't a real profession anymore. It doesn't attract writing talent, except at the margins. Why should it, journalism jobs have decreased by more than ~50% the last decade. Journalists are now just copywriters; optimizing for SEO and Google's spiders.

Journalism doesn't necessarily have to attract talented writers, just people who can write well enough to get the facts right. (This sounds like I'm bashing journalists, but I'm not.)

It's true for core of reporting. Being able to write clearly and accurately is important, but if the reporter isn't able to actually do the legwork of actual reporting, the result is clearly-written but empty of information. Being able to re-write a press release from the mayor's office isn't journalism.

Re: When did writing in major newspapers become so bad?

#50

Post by Mediterraneo10 » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #24

Something that I think is rarely discussed when this topic comes up is the loss of prestige. Working for The New York Times or The New Yorker used to have some weight with pretty much everyone in the country. That is no longer the case. It hasn't been so for at least a couple of decades. Extremely erudite-yet-mostly-apolitical people like Lewis Lapham [1] went to literary magazines and high-end journalism a half-cent…

It isn't just that journalism has become an ideological battleground. Even without the cultural warfare, once-mighty publications would still be seen as in decline. The issue is the modern ad-based internet economy. Due to the pressures of swiftly producing content that draws maximum clicks, journalists at even august publications are now forced to create articles little distinguishable from a minimum-wage content writer hired off some freelance platform.

There is also the issue of declining attention spans as people consume snackable content on their mobile devices. Journalists have always chafed at limitations of space, but they are under even more pressure today to be concise and eschew subtleties and nuance. The same length as a traditional magazine article from a couple of decades ago, is now seen as a "long read", something for only a niche audience.