5 ms·

Before getting too wrapped-up in the public-private argument, consider the fact that CNN, as usual, did not interview a single student of the private schools or

Before getting too wrapped-up in the public-private argument, consider the fact that CNN, as usual, did not interview a single student of the private schools or the public schools. They had only one quote from a parent, and they probably scraped it off of BIA's website. I would be shocked and amazed if they bothered to track down a parent and ask questions. As usual, CNN served as a mouthpiece to NGOs/bureaucrats/lobbyists/etc. who have absolutely no skin in the game as far as educational outputs go. It's not left-wing bias or right-wing bias so much as an aversion to the time and expense involved in actual reporting.

pg_is_a_butt 10y ago
As usual, HN commenter served as a mouthpiece for an ass. no one is watching CNN looking for news. who are you talking to? who are you trying to convince? what research did you do leading you to assume you could make any change in the world whatsoever? you're all idiots.
jondubois 10y ago
I think that pretty much every major corporation that exists today has become complacent/negligent like this to some extent. I have a theory: As corporations become monopolies (or become part of stable oligopolies); management becomes complacent and loses its focus on raw competence; they start to promote employees based on social connections (and popularity with peers) instead of skill - So then, actually competent employees become disillusioned with management, lose faith in the system and they get lazy. I think the workplace has become too social. Managers these days are terrible. I've worked with/for many managers as a contractor (maybe 10 in total) and out of all of them, I think there was only maybe 1 or 2 who were actually competent. I think if companies just promoted based on age, they'd do a better job overall. It's depressing to see brilliant, experienced people in their late 30s still working as low-ranking employees (under the direction of some inexperienced 20-something). Some big companies are indistinguishable from communism - People there are lazy because they know that good work doesn't get rewarded; it's the customers who end up paying through lost quality of goods and services.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  That's a good theory. I have a simpler one. You could call it the McDonald's theory of reporting. If people will buy junk at a premium, C-level guys are pretty much obligated to sell junk at a premium. If consumers wanted facts instead of the rage machine, they would get facts.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  FWIW, I think the Bloomberg terminals go for $24K a year now.
- abandonliberty 10y ago
  Congratulations! You have re-discovered the Iron Law of Oligarchy (1911). Organizations become oligarchies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy To kick your understanding of organizational problems up a level, I recommended watching CGP Grey's 'Rules for Rulers' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
Klathmon 10y ago
All journalism is like this now, and I don't blame them. When people block their ads (proudly I might ad), and refuse to pay, they don't have the money to do any actual reporting. Add on to that the fact that just repeating a tweet and speculating on it attracts the crowds who don't block ads, and you get what we have now. The masses only want a headline, and the rest won't pay for anything else anyway.
- jdc 10y ago
  Counterexample: https://www.propublica.org https://www.propublica.org
- frozenport 10y ago
  Counterpoint: Time Warner, CNN'S parent, profits are on the rise. http://fortune.com/2016/08/03/time-warner-beats-profit-estimates/ http://fortune.com/2016/08/03/time-warner-beats-profit-estim...
  - Klathmon 10y ago
    But that doesn't change anything. If profits are on the rise, obviously what they are currently doing is working.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  It's only been like this since the rise of the internet?
- voidz 10y ago
  Yeah man, and it has nothing to do with most media companies ending up being owned by just a few people. Give me a break.
gressquel 10y ago
I think we have to look at both side of the story here, as you say CNN presented one. But the other is really lacking in depth. Fake news has influenced the US presidential election. We know that the british government recently shut down Russia Todays UK offices for spreading propaganda. Information is a very powerful tool. And school is one of the places where children can be largely influenced by what they learn. I am not saying its 100% true but I think there may be some element of "western" ideals embedded in the school literature that makes the Ugandan government react. So again, we have to look from both sides here to understand the issue entirely.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  My complaint isn't that CNN took one side or the other. My complaint is that they did not engage in journalism. They took two competing press releases (both of which are probably littered with half-truths in addition to being biased), then assigned one of their writers in Atlanta or New York the task of mangling them into that abortion of a story. If this is what we accept as news, no wonder the world is so messed up.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  "British government denies role in NatWest closing bank accounts" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/17/russia-todays-uk-bank-accounts-frozen-says-editor https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/17/russia-todays-...
Angostura 10y ago
I'm sorry - I disagree. I think the reporting was reasonable. They reported the allegations, they reported the response from the Academy chain. The explained the wider context of what the chain does across different countries. They spoke to critics and supporters. Having a few anecdotage colour quotes from parents or students saying "I like it here" adds very little.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  What reporting? This was more like re-publication of dueling press releases. Reporting isn't lab science. A huge part of a reporter's job is to ask people questions. The value of interviewing students and parents is to get leads for other lines of inquiry which could potentially lead to new facts and perspectives for the story. Colour quotes are neither here nor there.
whack 10y ago
To be honest, your suggestions would actually make the article worse. Anecdotal evidence is worse than no evidence at all. Anecdotal evidence is extremely prone to bias and gives one the illusion of knowing what's happening, when in reality, they don't. If you really want to know what's happening, you would have to A) Poll a large distributed sample of students/parents B) construct objective and meaningful metrics by which the private/public schools can be compared Both A and B are extremely expensive, and do you really think western news readers like you and me would pay back CNN for such a major investment?
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  So, adding the anecdotal opinions of the schooled to the heavily biased and anecdotal opinions of the two camps of schoolers makes it worse? I think I'd have to try harder to make this article worse. If we take your value system here to the next step, it would be better if the article weren't written in the first place. Not a bad value system! Option A is a waste of time. B has merits. "Expensive" is relative. For what they pay Anderson Cooper alone, they could run a first-class news room.
sangnoir 10y ago
> consider the fact that CNN, as usual, did not interview a single student of the private schools or the public schools What makes you think a student would be able to quantify how qualified a school is? Might as well ask a random movie-goer about cinema fire code violations. As far as I can tell, this organisation set up schools in a country, didn't share the curriculum with the education board and has unqualified teachers instructing students. This sort of thing should be frowned upon anywhere in the world, regardless of how 'high-tech' the schools are or who the financiers are.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  I think as early as middle school, most kids could give you an honest assessment of which teachers taught them things and which ones were just collecting a check. That, and it doesn't look like they actually interviewed any parents either. If what the students think doesn't matter, and what the parents think doesn't matter, why should the opinions of 3rd-world educational bureaucrats matter?
  - sangnoir 10y ago
    > If what the students think doesn't matter, and what the parents think doesn't matter, why should the opinions of 3rd-world educational bureaucrats matter? Because they are responsible for the same functions as educational bureaucrats in developed countries: overseeing schools and educators. It is literally their job.
edblarney 10y ago
This is not true. CNN had interviewed entities from the system, and from the government. The story was not detailed, but not biased in any way. CNN is a mouthpiece for NGOs/Bureaucrats/Lobbyists? Really? Which 'bureaucrats'? Which 'lobbyists'? The reporting was reasonable.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  Not sure if lobbyists made an appearance in this story, but we do have the other food groups: "President of the Global Campaign for Education (GCE), Camilla Croso..." Her bio literally has NGO in it four times: http://www.campaignforeducation.org/en/about-us/our-board http://www.campaignforeducation.org/en/about-us/our-board "Director of Education Standards for the Ministry, Huzaifa Mutazindwa", chief bureaucrat: http://www.education.go.ug/data/smenu/47/About%20the%20Ministry%20.html http://www.education.go.ug/data/smenu/47/About%20the%20Minis... "Salima Namusobya, the Executive Director for the Initiative for Society and Economic Rights (ISER)..." Another NGO: http://iser-uganda.org/index.php/salima-namusobya.html http://iser-uganda.org/index.php/salima-namusobya.html If blindly re-publishing the words of spokespersons without any first-hand verification of their claims counts as reasonable reporting, then yes, very reasonable! People who watch these talking-heads shows on cable would probably even back you up on that. My feeling is that if a court or an education ministry is shutting down a school for being "unsanitary and unqualified," those are easy enough things to verify. They could do a surprise visit, take pictures, ask students a few questions, you know, like journalists did not so long ago.
  - edblarney 10y ago
    These agencies have credibility, far more so than the government of Uganda. And CNN is no making any statements about anything, they are just reporting on the positions of everyone involved. You know why CNN does not have a correspondent full-time in Uganda? Because people won't pay for content. If we paid them, they could afford it. Otherwise, they don't have people everywhere.

pg_is_a_butt 10y ago

As usual, HN commenter served as a mouthpiece for an ass. no one is watching CNN looking for news. who are you talking to? who are you trying to convince? what research did you do leading you to assume you could make any change in the world whatsoever? you're all idiots.

jondubois 10y ago

I think that pretty much every major corporation that exists today has become complacent/negligent like this to some extent. I have a theory: As corporations become monopolies (or become part of stable oligopolies); management becomes complacent and loses its focus on raw competence; they start to promote employees based on social connections (and popularity with peers) instead of skill - So then, actually competent employees become disillusioned with management, lose faith in the system and they get lazy. I think the workplace has become too social. Managers these days are terrible. I've worked with/for many managers as a contractor (maybe 10 in total) and out of all of them, I think there was only maybe 1 or 2 who were actually competent. I think if companies just promoted based on age, they'd do a better job overall. It's depressing to see brilliant, experienced people in their late 30s still working as low-ranking employees (under the direction of some inexperienced 20-something). Some big companies are indistinguishable from communism - People there are lazy because they know that good work doesn't get rewarded; it's the customers who end up paying through lost quality of goods and services.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
That's a good theory. I have a simpler one. You could call it the McDonald's theory of reporting. If people will buy junk at a premium, C-level guys are pretty much obligated to sell junk at a premium. If consumers wanted facts instead of the rage machine, they would get facts.
jstewartmobile 10y ago
FWIW, I think the Bloomberg terminals go for $24K a year now.
abandonliberty 10y ago
Congratulations! You have re-discovered the Iron Law of Oligarchy (1911). Organizations become oligarchies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy To kick your understanding of organizational problems up a level, I recommended watching CGP Grey's 'Rules for Rulers' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

Klathmon 10y ago

All journalism is like this now, and I don't blame them. When people block their ads (proudly I might ad), and refuse to pay, they don't have the money to do any actual reporting. Add on to that the fact that just repeating a tweet and speculating on it attracts the crowds who don't block ads, and you get what we have now. The masses only want a headline, and the rest won't pay for anything else anyway.

jdc 10y ago
Counterexample: https://www.propublica.org https://www.propublica.org
frozenport 10y ago
Counterpoint: Time Warner, CNN'S parent, profits are on the rise. http://fortune.com/2016/08/03/time-warner-beats-profit-estimates/ http://fortune.com/2016/08/03/time-warner-beats-profit-estim...
- Klathmon 10y ago
  But that doesn't change anything. If profits are on the rise, obviously what they are currently doing is working.
Chris2048 10y ago
It's only been like this since the rise of the internet?
voidz 10y ago
Yeah man, and it has nothing to do with most media companies ending up being owned by just a few people. Give me a break.

gressquel 10y ago

I think we have to look at both side of the story here, as you say CNN presented one. But the other is really lacking in depth. Fake news has influenced the US presidential election. We know that the british government recently shut down Russia Todays UK offices for spreading propaganda. Information is a very powerful tool. And school is one of the places where children can be largely influenced by what they learn. I am not saying its 100% true but I think there may be some element of "western" ideals embedded in the school literature that makes the Ugandan government react. So again, we have to look from both sides here to understand the issue entirely.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
My complaint isn't that CNN took one side or the other. My complaint is that they did not engage in journalism. They took two competing press releases (both of which are probably littered with half-truths in addition to being biased), then assigned one of their writers in Atlanta or New York the task of mangling them into that abortion of a story. If this is what we accept as news, no wonder the world is so messed up.
Chris2048 10y ago
"British government denies role in NatWest closing bank accounts" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/17/russia-todays-uk-bank-accounts-frozen-says-editor https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/17/russia-todays-...

Angostura 10y ago

I'm sorry - I disagree. I think the reporting was reasonable. They reported the allegations, they reported the response from the Academy chain. The explained the wider context of what the chain does across different countries. They spoke to critics and supporters. Having a few anecdotage colour quotes from parents or students saying "I like it here" adds very little.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
What reporting? This was more like re-publication of dueling press releases. Reporting isn't lab science. A huge part of a reporter's job is to ask people questions. The value of interviewing students and parents is to get leads for other lines of inquiry which could potentially lead to new facts and perspectives for the story. Colour quotes are neither here nor there.

whack 10y ago

To be honest, your suggestions would actually make the article worse. Anecdotal evidence is worse than no evidence at all. Anecdotal evidence is extremely prone to bias and gives one the illusion of knowing what's happening, when in reality, they don't. If you really want to know what's happening, you would have to A) Poll a large distributed sample of students/parents B) construct objective and meaningful metrics by which the private/public schools can be compared Both A and B are extremely expensive, and do you really think western news readers like you and me would pay back CNN for such a major investment?

jstewartmobile 10y ago
So, adding the anecdotal opinions of the schooled to the heavily biased and anecdotal opinions of the two camps of schoolers makes it worse? I think I'd have to try harder to make this article worse. If we take your value system here to the next step, it would be better if the article weren't written in the first place. Not a bad value system! Option A is a waste of time. B has merits. "Expensive" is relative. For what they pay Anderson Cooper alone, they could run a first-class news room.

sangnoir 10y ago

> consider the fact that CNN, as usual, did not interview a single student of the private schools or the public schools What makes you think a student would be able to quantify how qualified a school is? Might as well ask a random movie-goer about cinema fire code violations. As far as I can tell, this organisation set up schools in a country, didn't share the curriculum with the education board and has unqualified teachers instructing students. This sort of thing should be frowned upon anywhere in the world, regardless of how 'high-tech' the schools are or who the financiers are.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
I think as early as middle school, most kids could give you an honest assessment of which teachers taught them things and which ones were just collecting a check. That, and it doesn't look like they actually interviewed any parents either. If what the students think doesn't matter, and what the parents think doesn't matter, why should the opinions of 3rd-world educational bureaucrats matter?
- sangnoir 10y ago
  > If what the students think doesn't matter, and what the parents think doesn't matter, why should the opinions of 3rd-world educational bureaucrats matter? Because they are responsible for the same functions as educational bureaucrats in developed countries: overseeing schools and educators. It is literally their job.

edblarney 10y ago

This is not true. CNN had interviewed entities from the system, and from the government. The story was not detailed, but not biased in any way. CNN is a mouthpiece for NGOs/Bureaucrats/Lobbyists? Really? Which 'bureaucrats'? Which 'lobbyists'? The reporting was reasonable.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
Not sure if lobbyists made an appearance in this story, but we do have the other food groups: "President of the Global Campaign for Education (GCE), Camilla Croso..." Her bio literally has NGO in it four times: http://www.campaignforeducation.org/en/about-us/our-board http://www.campaignforeducation.org/en/about-us/our-board "Director of Education Standards for the Ministry, Huzaifa Mutazindwa", chief bureaucrat: http://www.education.go.ug/data/smenu/47/About%20the%20Ministry%20.html http://www.education.go.ug/data/smenu/47/About%20the%20Minis... "Salima Namusobya, the Executive Director for the Initiative for Society and Economic Rights (ISER)..." Another NGO: http://iser-uganda.org/index.php/salima-namusobya.html http://iser-uganda.org/index.php/salima-namusobya.html If blindly re-publishing the words of spokespersons without any first-hand verification of their claims counts as reasonable reporting, then yes, very reasonable! People who watch these talking-heads shows on cable would probably even back you up on that. My feeling is that if a court or an education ministry is shutting down a school for being "unsanitary and unqualified," those are easy enough things to verify. They could do a surprise visit, take pictures, ask students a few questions, you know, like journalists did not so long ago.
- edblarney 10y ago
  These agencies have credibility, far more so than the government of Uganda. And CNN is no making any statements about anything, they are just reporting on the positions of everyone involved. You know why CNN does not have a correspondent full-time in Uganda? Because people won't pay for content. If we paid them, they could afford it. Otherwise, they don't have people everywhere.