5 ms·

"Always doubt the media" is bad advice. It's solid advice. Journalists have really become the used car salesmen of the 21st century. They should be doubted by

by blfr 11y ago

"Always doubt the media" is bad advice. It's solid advice. Journalists have really become the used car salesmen of the 21st century. They should be doubted by default. With declining revenues the salaries dropped and people attracted to the profession are more and more often outright propagandists for whom the ability to push their views is part of the compensation package. For the same reason sponsors get more control over content. Not to mention changes in ownership. Even the esteemed NYT is on life support provided by Carlos Slim who is now its biggest shareholder. And let's not overestimate the energy required to doubt the media. You could probably stop consuming any reporting or journalism, stop watching tv, stop reading newspapers and live just fine. It's just not that important to know about all the events you cannot influence anyway.

tomhoward 11y ago
Though I can agree with those who say he sometimes goes too far with his bullying, Nassim Nicholas Taleb has worthwhile things to say that align with this. In the past journalism was an act of courage, revealing truths in the face of powerful establishments and risking jail or even death. Today (except in such repressive regimes as as Syria or Russia and except for war correspondents) it is becoming the refuge of disconnected cowards. In my entire career I have never seen a financial journalist go to "the other side", that is pull the trigger or engage in risk taking or in any situation in which one can be exposed to harm from one's opinion. This can be generalized to journalists in general, who rarely, if ever, switch to doing, all the while pontificating on "Steve Job's mistakes" or similar purported errors of others, or praising Geithner and other powerful frauds. Jazi Zilber wondered why journalists seemingly so knowledgeable about politics never become politicians. It is the same problem: modern journalists are designed to be either cowards, or have a need to escape reality. Yet the tragedy is that doers are in contact with the world through journalists. [1] In his podcast with James Altucher, he explains how he makes a point of taking a bit of time out each week to publicly troll egotistical journalists, because, hey, someone has to. [2] And though I don't have a citation, I recall one his tips for better living is to avoid spending time/brain cycles consuming mainstream news at all. If something is important enough that you must know about it, he argues, someone will tell you about it. [1] https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/?target_post=10151318978788375&ref=story_permalink https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/?target_post=10151318978788... [2] http://www.stansberryradio.com/Frank-Curzio/Latest-Episodes/Episode/727/Ep-45-Nassim-Taleb-Why-You-Should-Embrace-Uncertainty http://www.stansberryradio.com/Frank-Curzio/Latest-Episodes/...
superuser2 11y ago
You'll be fine in the short term. But in 30 years, when there is no one even pretending to serve as a check against institutional abuses, when 0% of the electorate has any idea at all what is happening in the world, when if you find that something unconscionable there is absolutely no way to get people to know or care about it... what then? In a world without press that is listened to, a bad actor could literally remount the Holocaust in plain sight and no one would stop it because no one would know. Public officials act in the public interest because their constituencies read the news and demand that something be done about it. Sure, this isn't what they do all or even most of the time, but can you imagine a world where it doesn't happen at all? Many facets of government and business cannot function without some sort of professional collection and analysis of facts about what's happening in the world. I expect that in our post-journalism society, public and private intelligence agencies will expand enormously and start doing something that looks an awful lot like journalism, except for very small and inordinately wealthy institutional readers instead of the public.
- blfr 11y ago
  Journalists do not provide a check against institutional abuses. When the Soviet Union was literally staging a holocaust in plain sight, the NYT lied to cover it up[1]. Walter Duranty still has a Pulitzer to his name for reports from the Soviet Union. Supposedly the greatest triumph of journalism, lionized in a movie, uncovering of Watergate was done by an insider who just told the journalists. Nowadays, they're not even necessary for this. I learned about Snowden leaks from here and Wikileaks. And then nothing happened. The only reason I can see why people believe journalists are heroic fighters for truth, checks against tyranny, and so on is because they rely on journalists for stories about journalists. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Walter_Duranty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Walter...
vu3rdd 11y ago
I forget where I read it, but it was many years ago. But paraphrased, it read "never believe anything you read in print". It was quite an eye opening statement for me.

by blfr 11y ago

tomhoward 11y ago

Though I can agree with those who say he sometimes goes too far with his bullying, Nassim Nicholas Taleb has worthwhile things to say that align with this. In the past journalism was an act of courage, revealing truths in the face of powerful establishments and risking jail or even death. Today (except in such repressive regimes as as Syria or Russia and except for war correspondents) it is becoming the refuge of disconnected cowards. In my entire career I have never seen a financial journalist go to "the other side", that is pull the trigger or engage in risk taking or in any situation in which one can be exposed to harm from one's opinion. This can be generalized to journalists in general, who rarely, if ever, switch to doing, all the while pontificating on "Steve Job's mistakes" or similar purported errors of others, or praising Geithner and other powerful frauds. Jazi Zilber wondered why journalists seemingly so knowledgeable about politics never become politicians. It is the same problem: modern journalists are designed to be either cowards, or have a need to escape reality. Yet the tragedy is that doers are in contact with the world through journalists. [1] In his podcast with James Altucher, he explains how he makes a point of taking a bit of time out each week to publicly troll egotistical journalists, because, hey, someone has to. [2] And though I don't have a citation, I recall one his tips for better living is to avoid spending time/brain cycles consuming mainstream news at all. If something is important enough that you must know about it, he argues, someone will tell you about it. [1] https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/?target_post=10151318978788375&ref=story_permalink https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/?target_post=10151318978788... [2] http://www.stansberryradio.com/Frank-Curzio/Latest-Episodes/Episode/727/Ep-45-Nassim-Taleb-Why-You-Should-Embrace-Uncertainty http://www.stansberryradio.com/Frank-Curzio/Latest-Episodes/...

superuser2 11y ago

You'll be fine in the short term. But in 30 years, when there is no one even pretending to serve as a check against institutional abuses, when 0% of the electorate has any idea at all what is happening in the world, when if you find that something unconscionable there is absolutely no way to get people to know or care about it... what then? In a world without press that is listened to, a bad actor could literally remount the Holocaust in plain sight and no one would stop it because no one would know. Public officials act in the public interest because their constituencies read the news and demand that something be done about it. Sure, this isn't what they do all or even most of the time, but can you imagine a world where it doesn't happen at all? Many facets of government and business cannot function without some sort of professional collection and analysis of facts about what's happening in the world. I expect that in our post-journalism society, public and private intelligence agencies will expand enormously and start doing something that looks an awful lot like journalism, except for very small and inordinately wealthy institutional readers instead of the public.

blfr 11y ago
Journalists do not provide a check against institutional abuses. When the Soviet Union was literally staging a holocaust in plain sight, the NYT lied to cover it up[1]. Walter Duranty still has a Pulitzer to his name for reports from the Soviet Union. Supposedly the greatest triumph of journalism, lionized in a movie, uncovering of Watergate was done by an insider who just told the journalists. Nowadays, they're not even necessary for this. I learned about Snowden leaks from here and Wikileaks. And then nothing happened. The only reason I can see why people believe journalists are heroic fighters for truth, checks against tyranny, and so on is because they rely on journalists for stories about journalists. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Walter_Duranty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Walter...

vu3rdd 11y ago

I forget where I read it, but it was many years ago. But paraphrased, it read "never believe anything you read in print". It was quite an eye opening statement for me.