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

71–80 of 111 posts

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

#71

Post by Dylan16807 »

sandworm101 wrote: post #41
jimbob45 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s really very little objectivity in the study of English writing. It would make sense that teachers would gravitate to the only real objective part of their discipline - citations - in a desperate attempt to be able to reliably test students. No surprise the profession has embraced citations to the point of absurdity. Granted, teaching soft skills is hard but English teachers seem to have universally given up t…

There used to be. There once was a host of rules one had to follow, from spelling to sentence structure. Students were tested on thier objective ability to recognize and correct grammar. That is now dead. Schools accept junk so long as it nails the citation format. Students are taught that they can rely on culture and common knowedge rather than bother with proper language.

Testing grammar is objective but it's hardly any better. It's a waste of advanced education time.

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

#72

Post by _Algernon_ »

robocat wrote: post #26
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.

> throw you out immediately for plagiarism Only by twisting the meaning of plagiarism to be defined as word-for-word. Universities intensively train students to accept plagiarism so long as the copy is sufficiently reworded (and hopefully referenced). That sick and pointless system is ironically being exposed by student usage of LLMs.

Not sure what kind of university you went to but at mine it was always about ideas. If you get an idea from somewhere else, you had to cite the original work, no matter how much you rewrote it. It's not just direct quotes that need to be cited.

That of course doesn't mean that every instance of plagiarism is actually detected but the principles are there.

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

#73

Post by aa-jv »

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 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.

So? Why should this be considered a special case? Its no different than programming, for example.

The idea that only authorities should be able to report as journalists is anathema to a free and open, democratic society.

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

#74

Post by dannyobrien »

pastage wrote: post #67
grumbel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be more impressed if they'd used a hyperlink. But that's apparently forbidden in modern journalism.

It is not worth the bother. I really wish I had a source for this because it stills feels important, and I value links more than most. Links would be nice but it does not add enough value to be worth it, it actually costs too much and is easy to mess up. The ones who care will search for it, and the great majority can not be bothered. Source: internal statistic from a webbserver, with fact heavy articles. There were…

Costs too much in what way? In time?

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

#75

Post by ludicrousdispla »

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 not saying that the author is not a journalist, or inferring that they're a blogger.

I think you mean to say that you're not implying they're a blogger.

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

#76

Post by Max-Ganz-II »

She's on BlueSky, which is where I came to know of her.

She has been essential to keeping up to date with developments in the USA regarding Donald.

I subscribed to her newsletter last month.

It seems to me mainstream media doesn't really cut the mustard.

I get most of my information these days from specialist blogs, run by individuals.

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

#77

Post by petesergeant »

xyzal wrote: post #52
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.

I pay for my news and one of the sources I pay is one of the sources she complains about

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

#78

Post by FrustratedMonky »

dannyobrien wrote: post #74
pastage wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not worth the bother. I really wish I had a source for this because it stills feels important, and I value links more than most. Links would be nice but it does not add enough value to be worth it, it actually costs too much and is easy to mess up. The ones who care will search for it, and the great majority can not be bothered. Source: internal statistic from a webbserver, with fact heavy articles. There were…

Costs too much in what way? In time?

a lot of sites don't add hyperlinks. that seems to be a new trend. don't think that is reason to criticize this particular article, for not doing what a lot of sites are also not doing.

and yes, it does take time.

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

#79

Post by lysace »

ab5tract wrote: post #43
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.

This is totally ahistorical. Regional newspapers would “break” stories that would then get picked up by national outlets. In that system it was the standard to reference the paper that first reported the story. People understandably have a hard time conceptualizing a highly dynamic and diverse news media landscape these days, but back when it was working like it was supposed to —- before Clinton-era reforms destroyed…

I believe you refer to this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996

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

#80

Post by Cthulhu_ »

Max-Ganz-II wrote: post #76

She's on BlueSky, which is where I came to know of her. She has been essential to keeping up to date with developments in the USA regarding Donald. I subscribed to her newsletter last month. It seems to me mainstream media doesn't really cut the mustard. I get most of my information these days from specialist blogs, run by individuals.

It's a tricky one; one wants to trust the media because they should have integrity and checks and balances and the like - which you don't know if unafilliated independent bloggers have.

But the bloggers are also great, but you need to do some more homework to decide if they are trustworthy - no editorial team, no journalistic ethical codes (if those actually exist), etc.

The other factor is that a lot of the conspiracy thinkers based their beliefs on blogs or the equivalent thereof (FB posts, youtube videos, etc), stuff you wouldn't see in the mainstream media - because it's nonsense, but the fact the mainstream media doesn't cover it actually draws the attention to the conspiracy bloggers.

Post reply on HN