2 ms·

If so, sorry that I implied that. Sad is, that we have to switch between various news services, often depending on their 'point of view'. Good journalism is go

by zalew 17y ago

If so, sorry that I implied that. Sad is, that we have to switch between various news services, often depending on their 'point of view'. Good journalism is good coverage and following discussion, not giving answers; but that's utopia.

jacquesm 17y ago
I think that it has become impossible to release 'news' simply as facts without coloration. Even if you look at a simple thing like a one vehicle accident there are usually several variations of it as re-told by the various witnesses, getting to the bottom of the objective truth is a real exercise in human psychology. We all have this, even the best trained reporter. There is a science fiction book which tells about 'professional witnesses', people that are trained to observe and report only what they observe. One example given is a house, and the 'simple' person responds the house is white, but the professional witness reports the side of the house they can see is white. It's a subtle difference, but it shows the world of assumptions underlying our observations, we all do this to some extent. By interrogating multiple sources and selecting what they agree on you can get to some basis of truth, and you can select items that are likely to be bias. Maybe there is a need for a news 'meta service' that scans the 'regular news' for reports and does as good a job of removing the bias as possible. This would be interesting, because I think it would make the news extremely boring, plenty of the 'bias' is what gets people excited about the news, facts are 'dry' and not very interesting.
- zalew 17y ago
  Yeah, I know what you mean. What I am criticizing here, is that many contemporary journalists in mainstream media focus too much on giving simple answers and hot headlines instead of seeking evidence. From the few news services I have watched, I found AJ to be offering the most comprehensive analysis of reported subjects. That's why I found strange that you were surprised by their balanced reporting.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    For the longest time, when it came to the Iraq war there were several Western European news sources that I think held the 'moral high ground' in how they reported the news. Al Jazeera was good, but definitely coloured. Now I find that Al Jazeera is actually much better than 'our' sources, and this article is the first time I've ever had that feeling. Normally they're good but not 'great'. In this article, which for their audience must be very inflammable material they actually take the time and point out the caveats much more clearly than some of the 'local' news sources in NL, the UK and in France. There is plenty of stuff here that needs investigating and Al Jazeera does an amazing job of outlining the potential pitfalls in interpreting the video and the 'untold' side of the American military. I really think that by doing that they deserve to be taken much more serious by people from 'the west', but for some reason the majority here seems to be stuck on what can be had in a basic cable subscription and preferably locally produced. There is a world of information available to all of us but sifting through it is a lot of work, especially if a subject is politically sensitive.

by zalew 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

I think that it has become impossible to release 'news' simply as facts without coloration. Even if you look at a simple thing like a one vehicle accident there are usually several variations of it as re-told by the various witnesses, getting to the bottom of the objective truth is a real exercise in human psychology. We all have this, even the best trained reporter. There is a science fiction book which tells about 'professional witnesses', people that are trained to observe and report only what they observe. One example given is a house, and the 'simple' person responds the house is white, but the professional witness reports the side of the house they can see is white. It's a subtle difference, but it shows the world of assumptions underlying our observations, we all do this to some extent. By interrogating multiple sources and selecting what they agree on you can get to some basis of truth, and you can select items that are likely to be bias. Maybe there is a need for a news 'meta service' that scans the 'regular news' for reports and does as good a job of removing the bias as possible. This would be interesting, because I think it would make the news extremely boring, plenty of the 'bias' is what gets people excited about the news, facts are 'dry' and not very interesting.

zalew 17y ago
Yeah, I know what you mean. What I am criticizing here, is that many contemporary journalists in mainstream media focus too much on giving simple answers and hot headlines instead of seeking evidence. From the few news services I have watched, I found AJ to be offering the most comprehensive analysis of reported subjects. That's why I found strange that you were surprised by their balanced reporting.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  For the longest time, when it came to the Iraq war there were several Western European news sources that I think held the 'moral high ground' in how they reported the news. Al Jazeera was good, but definitely coloured. Now I find that Al Jazeera is actually much better than 'our' sources, and this article is the first time I've ever had that feeling. Normally they're good but not 'great'. In this article, which for their audience must be very inflammable material they actually take the time and point out the caveats much more clearly than some of the 'local' news sources in NL, the UK and in France. There is plenty of stuff here that needs investigating and Al Jazeera does an amazing job of outlining the potential pitfalls in interpreting the video and the 'untold' side of the American military. I really think that by doing that they deserve to be taken much more serious by people from 'the west', but for some reason the majority here seems to be stuck on what can be had in a basic cable subscription and preferably locally produced. There is a world of information available to all of us but sifting through it is a lot of work, especially if a subject is politically sensitive.