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

Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 81 posts

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#41

Post by bodiekane »

achandlerwhite wrote: post #4

Examples in there of employee healthcare woes... sure with we just had universal healthcare.

Getting laid off doesn't end health insurance, it's ironically bad journalism that they included that misleading question, from an apparently uninformed person.

The typical flow would be: current insurance continues unaltered for the rest of the month. Following month you're automatically covered under same policy through COBRA provisions even if you take no action. (Obviously some employers would include multiple months of employer-paid coverage, but this example is a worst-case scenario if they don't give any additional coverage in severance).

Somewhere in the 60 days following getting laid off, you need to decide between A) sign up to continue your existing insurance plan through COBRA B) sign up for a new insurance plan through healthcare.gov (subsidized if low income) or C) sign up on your spouse's plan if applicable.

It's a hassle, but you have a couple months to figure out what's best for you, and you can continue any ongoing things without interruption.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#42

Post by uptown »

ycdxvjp wrote: post #28

No one has any great theories on what to do about info overload. So it's going to suck until someone comes up with something new.

The original Circa had a great approach to this IMO. They chunked up news into smaller pieces of information, and gave you a way to indicate interest in receiving follow-up notifications about a given story.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#43

Post by hotpotamus »

bodiekane wrote: post #41
achandlerwhite wrote: post #4

Examples in there of employee healthcare woes... sure with we just had universal healthcare.

Getting laid off doesn't end health insurance, it's ironically bad journalism that they included that misleading question, from an apparently uninformed person. The typical flow would be: current insurance continues unaltered for the rest of the month. Following month you're automatically covered under same policy through COBRA provisions even if you take no action. (Obviously some employers would include multiple mo…

A) COBRA doesn't apply if the company is out of business and is often prohibitively expensive anyway. B) Try living in a state that's hostile to "Obamacare" C) Not everyone is married.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#44

Post by thejohnconway »

BadHumans wrote: post #29
thejohnconway wrote: post #2

Almost as if a for-profit model isn’t a great fit for journalism… especially on the internet.

How do you suggest we pay journalist? They certainty shouldn't work for free.

Non-profit organisations. Large and small foundations and charities. This is not a solution, I don’t know how to get there, but I think it would get better results.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#45

Post by burnerburnson »

booleandilemma wrote: post #5

I love the title "brunchlord".

The only thing I like about it is that it makes it easy to know whether I should care about this person's opinion.

Sure enough, the blog post was completely deranged -- to the point that the author even tried to present it as a given that reporting on both sides of an issue is a bad thing. This moron is legitimately mad that modern journalism isn't propagandistic enough. Incredible.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#46

Post by camgunz »

orionsbelt wrote: post #15
_uhtu wrote: post #6

Kissinger's death was where I really started detaching myself from news media entirely. It was extremely hard to find an article or video that didn't say the exact same thing in almost identical wording: "was kissinger a war criminal? well he was certainly controversial but his influence stood large". No, objectively, he was a war criminal. Bombing Cambodia and several other actions were, factually, legally, war crim…

I think it’s hard for an obituary to definitely call someone a war criminal when he was never tried, much less convicted, of a war crime. That’s not to say he shouldn’t have been or his actions don’t qualify, but an obituary is supposed to be somewhat neutral and not an opinion piece, and the facts are that he’s been labeled (perhaps fairly) a war criminal by many, but never actually convicted.

The US isn't a part of the war crimes part of the ICC, therefore no US citizen will ever be tried there. Thus, by your logic, there can be no US war criminals.

I think the actual nuance here is that, in the words of the West Wing, all war is a crime. Sometimes the term "war criminal" is used fairly, other times it's trotted out to try and tar people/movements. The US knows this and does it, which is why it doesn't submit to the circus. I'm not excusing the horrible stuff the US has done, but I think I agree that humanity hasn't gotten to the point where we can really fairly avoid or judge war crimes.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#47

Post by seanicus »

dihydro wrote: post #33
taeric wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. Feels a lot like insider gossip that thought they had more going for themselves? That said, "It’s a radical idea, but we could make meaningful progress if we clawed journalism from the hands of affluent, out of touch brunchlords, and put it back under the control of diverse, hungry journalists and editors who actually understand the news industry and media environment they work and exist in." is also a rather b…

In my opinion, "journalism for journalism's sake" would be what we call reporting the truth, or investigative journalism. Is there a national outlet that invests in pure investigative journalism anymore?

If you're looking for investigative journalism The Intercept isn't a bad read

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#48

Post by 65 »

BadHumans wrote: post #29
thejohnconway wrote: post #2

Almost as if a for-profit model isn’t a great fit for journalism… especially on the internet.

How do you suggest we pay journalist? They certainty shouldn't work for free.

Either form journalist orgs as non-profits (e.g NPR) or modernize journalism content (e.g Morning Brew). The traditional print news model is getting increasingly out of date and it's going to take a bunch of old geezers dying to modernize journalism. It's still "content", and news outlets need to keep up with changing consumer tastes.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#49

Post by bre1010 »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #13
javawizard wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having not heard about the Messenger before today, I'm not sure what ideological position you're talking about. Can you elaborate?

It's a-little-ambiguously-coded pro-MAGA how dare people hate the right, the right will have its revenge bit. It doesn't really talk to The Messenger.

I agree that this is what OP is saying. But it's funny that that didn't actually happen? All I saw was mainstream media outlets continuously chiding their own readers for not being sufficiently empathetic to poor, white, Trump voters.

Re: Messenger Implosion Shows Journalism Lead by Visionless, Fail-Upward Brunchlords

#50

Post by taeric »

dihydro wrote: post #33
taeric wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. Feels a lot like insider gossip that thought they had more going for themselves? That said, "It’s a radical idea, but we could make meaningful progress if we clawed journalism from the hands of affluent, out of touch brunchlords, and put it back under the control of diverse, hungry journalists and editors who actually understand the news industry and media environment they work and exist in." is also a rather b…

In my opinion, "journalism for journalism's sake" would be what we call reporting the truth, or investigative journalism. Is there a national outlet that invests in pure investigative journalism anymore?

That is the noble way to consider it, but as soon as something starts existing for its own sake, you start losing the reason the thing was enacted the first time.

I'd hazard the "pure" journalism you are seeing in your mind likely wasn't nearly as pure as you'd think it was. There is a reason a lot of very long lived scandals have always been the case. Even more true as you consider news crossing country boundaries. Any specific examples you have in mind?

Post reply on HN