4 ms·

Have you seen Aaron Sorkin's most recent TV show, The Newsroom? It's mostly left-leaning (by American standards, at least) so you may not like it (apologies if

by corin_ 11y ago

Have you seen Aaron Sorkin's most recent TV show, The Newsroom? It's mostly left-leaning (by American standards, at least) so you may not like it (apologies if I've mis-judged your political stance..), but personally I thought it was a great - though often very flawed - show. Anyway, the reason I mention it is that one story theme is the idea that balanced journalism doesn't always mean 50% to each side. I can't find the quote I want from the show with a quick Google, but here's a very similar quote from Sorkin himself: 'I don’t believe the truth always lies in the middle. I don’t believe there are two sides to every argument. I think the facts are the center. And watching the news abandon the facts in favor of “fairness” is what’s troubling to me.' Regardless of whether it was said by Trump or Clinton, if someone says they "watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering [at the 9/11 attacks]" and then claimed they saw it on TV, and then facts showed that this was never shown on TV because as far as anyone can tell it didn't happen... I'd want to see an article about them lying. And that article would naturally make the side of whoever lied look worse. Nothing partisan about it.

mercer 11y ago
I've been watching The West Wing again (also Sorkin), and even though I really like the show, at times I cringe at how self-righteous and patronizing the writing can be. One thing that made the show more palatable was the addition of Ainsley Hayes, a Republican who is hired by the White House on the president's insistence (and causes much grumbling from the other characters initially). She specifically calls out the self-righteous attitude of the other characters and their simplistic view of all Republicans as gun-toting hillbillies. I stopped watching The Newsroom because it was both more extreme in its partisanship and in its oversimplification of the opposition. And it didn't have an Ainsley Hayes character (or at least not one as good). I grew up as a very religious evangelical christian, and as such I grew up alongside many American evangelicals who would never vote for the baby-killing atheist Democrats. And while I strongly disagree with most of their views, I've come to realize that this is not because they're stupid and I'm smart, or because they're mean and I'm kind, or because they're lazy and I am not, but rather most of the time it's because we just disagree on some very fundamental issues. If I were to accept their axioms to be true, they can provide coherent and perhaps even convincing arguments. I know this because I believed much of what they believe myself. Sure, I was younger, but I wasn't stupid. Or at least not more stupid than I am now...
- corin_ 11y ago
  Personally the shows suited my political views, but I definitely always saw how they could be much less fun to watch for other people. An interesting quote from the same Sorkin interview [1] I mentioned before: Question: 'Will’s take is that liberals don’t know how to win and conservatives are wrong and often ignorant. The left will like that version of fairness more than the right will.' Sorkin's Answer: 'All I can say is this: First of all, my biggest concern always is, was it a good story, well told? I’m not thinking about the politics at all. But I don’t want to make the same mistake that I accuse the media of making, which is that they all better be equal accusations on all sides, that fairness is somehow a virtue in art. It’s not. Fairness and balance don’t have anything to do with art. This isn’t journalism, and it doesn’t have to live by those rules. It’s meant to have a subjective point of view and an authorial voice.' [1] http://www.vulture.com/2012/06/aaron-sorkin-newsroom-interview.html http://www.vulture.com/2012/06/aaron-sorkin-newsroom-intervi...

by corin_ 11y ago

mercer 11y ago

I've been watching The West Wing again (also Sorkin), and even though I really like the show, at times I cringe at how self-righteous and patronizing the writing can be. One thing that made the show more palatable was the addition of Ainsley Hayes, a Republican who is hired by the White House on the president's insistence (and causes much grumbling from the other characters initially). She specifically calls out the self-righteous attitude of the other characters and their simplistic view of all Republicans as gun-toting hillbillies. I stopped watching The Newsroom because it was both more extreme in its partisanship and in its oversimplification of the opposition. And it didn't have an Ainsley Hayes character (or at least not one as good). I grew up as a very religious evangelical christian, and as such I grew up alongside many American evangelicals who would never vote for the baby-killing atheist Democrats. And while I strongly disagree with most of their views, I've come to realize that this is not because they're stupid and I'm smart, or because they're mean and I'm kind, or because they're lazy and I am not, but rather most of the time it's because we just disagree on some very fundamental issues. If I were to accept their axioms to be true, they can provide coherent and perhaps even convincing arguments. I know this because I believed much of what they believe myself. Sure, I was younger, but I wasn't stupid. Or at least not more stupid than I am now...

corin_ 11y ago
Personally the shows suited my political views, but I definitely always saw how they could be much less fun to watch for other people. An interesting quote from the same Sorkin interview [1] I mentioned before: Question: 'Will’s take is that liberals don’t know how to win and conservatives are wrong and often ignorant. The left will like that version of fairness more than the right will.' Sorkin's Answer: 'All I can say is this: First of all, my biggest concern always is, was it a good story, well told? I’m not thinking about the politics at all. But I don’t want to make the same mistake that I accuse the media of making, which is that they all better be equal accusations on all sides, that fairness is somehow a virtue in art. It’s not. Fairness and balance don’t have anything to do with art. This isn’t journalism, and it doesn’t have to live by those rules. It’s meant to have a subjective point of view and an authorial voice.' [1] http://www.vulture.com/2012/06/aaron-sorkin-newsroom-interview.html http://www.vulture.com/2012/06/aaron-sorkin-newsroom-intervi...