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

“An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

thehandbasket.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 111 posts

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#51

Post by monkeyelite »

xyst wrote: post #5

It shocks me to this day that news articles and journalists barely cite their sources. The best I have seen is shitty hyperlinked sources l, which are subject to link rot over time. Thus losing the context/source if underlying paper goes under or company decides to overhaul content system. What’s the point of learning APA or MLA citation in high school and college but journalists don’t even bother with it? Insane to…

> What’s the point of learning APA or MLA citation

To give teachers an objective criteria to grade with - in an otherwise subjective assignment.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#52

Post by xyzal »

mullingitover wrote: post #23

It's funny that universities will throw you out immediately for plagiarism (some will throw you out if you're aware of it but don't report it ), but major publications will do it (this isn't the same as scholastic plagiarism, but it's the journalistic equivalent) out in the open and shamelessly with no repercussions.

You don't pay for your news? Well, you get what you pay for.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#53

Post by danihh »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #38
djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

I’m sure that opinions vary widely on this, but I follow people and not companies.

With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience.

As long as they create quality content, I’m more than happy to subscribe to whatever platform they choose to use.

True quality (especially once you get into the niches) is extremely valuable/interesting and to paraphrase Van Gogh, wheat is wheat, even if townsfolk see it as grass at first.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#54

Post by pell »

danihh wrote: post #53
marcus_holmes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

I’m sure that opinions vary widely on this, but I follow people and not companies. With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. As long as they create quality content, I’m more than happy to subscribe to whatever platform they choose to use. True quality (especially once you get into the niches) is extremely valuable/interesting and to…

> With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience.

Cultivating an audience is one thing but serious investigative journalism often takes considerable amount of time and money. Most journalists I’ve seen on Substack and similar platforms seem to mainly do commentary, summaries of topics, interviews, and the like. There is a place for that of course but it isn’t really filling the need for investigative journalism too well at the moment.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#55

Post by snthpy »

djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

Thanks, that's a really interesting perspective. None of the parts were new to me but the framing has got me thinking about it in a new way. I am now wondering what different incentives would align it more with my values or orient it towards societal outcomes that I care about?

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#56

Post by starspangled »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #38
djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

If qualification, accreditation, integrity is overseen and regulated and handed out by multinational corporations and organizations, owned by and run for billionaires with shady connections and hidden backroom deals among governments, bureaucrats, corporations, the rich, etc., then that really does not "qualify" them to report on very much at all except what maintains the status quo and advances the interests of the ruling class.

A least with independent journalists there is a chance they might not be compromised. Not so, corporate journalists.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#57

Post by christkv »

djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

More and more is opinion which is cheap and in many cases can be outsourced for no money down. Then you have sponsored articles that are just ads disguised as news.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#58

Post by somenameforme »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #38
djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

There are obviously some extremely high profile incidents of journalists being forced to promote an ostensibly partisan view in recent times, but that's generally only when the ownership flip flops on their views. And the reason for this is quite insidious. Knowing somebody's partisanship, biases, and other interests in pretty easy in modern times for people who like to be visible which is, more or less by definition, always true for journalists. So if you want bias [x] or partisanship [y], you simply only hire people of such partisanship or bias. So there's only a problem when you change your mind about the 'right' biases.

And I don't think there's any legacy media outlet that's really independent now a days. They've all gone hardcore partisan one way or the other, and all frame things in strong accordance with US geopolitical policy. For instance imagine how absurdly different the coverage would look if what was happening between Israel and Gaza was instead, otherwise identically, happening between China and Xinjiang (Uyghurs).

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#59

Post by jachee »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #38
djoldman wrote: post #34

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

> There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0].

There doesn't have to be. No reason to gatekeep it. Anyone doing investigative work, and publishing their findings in a structured way qualifies as a journalist. In fact, the more journalists there are speaking truth to power, the more we all benefit.

Re: “An independent journalist” who won't remain nameless

#60

Post by [deleted] »

danihh wrote: post #53
marcus_holmes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organ…

I’m sure that opinions vary widely on this, but I follow people and not companies. With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. As long as they create quality content, I’m more than happy to subscribe to whatever platform they choose to use. True quality (especially once you get into the niches) is extremely valuable/interesting and to…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN