4 ms·

> Is this even journalism? I wondered this also, when the popups in the lower right kept presenting a chat box with "Can we help you with something?"(from gitp

> Is this even journalism? I wondered this also, when the popups in the lower right kept presenting a chat box with "Can we help you with something?"(from gitprime). Do they want to sell me something, or do they want me to read their publication?

geofft 10y ago
Am I missing the sarcasm at some point in this thread, or something? It's very clear to me that this is not journalism, and shouldn't be read with the expectation that it conforms to journalistic standards, any more than some observation on distributed systems on a personal blog should be read with the expectation that it conforms to scientific standards. It's a different type of content, which has a different kind of value. Are people trusting the claims the way they'd trust journalism from a known good media organization (or a paper from a known good research organization)?
- colechristensen 10y ago
  If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it should follow journalistic standards. The fact that it obviously isn't is irrelevant. If you're going to pretend to be a journalist, do it right or don't do it at all.
  - geofft 10y ago
    So, should I not post things about distributed systems to my blog without rigorous peer review, lest I get accused of pretending to be a scientist? (I'm genuinely confused about how this person is pretending to be a journalist. It doesn't look like journalism at all to me, starting from the part where it's on some startup's blog. What am I missing?)
    - minimaxir 10y ago
      There's a difference, IMO, between a blog post from a person in their spare time and a blog post by a startup whose main purpose is to get people to sign up for it.
      - rexpop 10y ago
        Less of a difference, IMO, than that between either of those blogs and a reputable journalistic outfit.
    - joatmon-snoo 10y ago
      I wouldn't argue the journalism point, but it's very clear that the blog post is an attempt to (1) present solid statistics and (2) bolster their own credibility because "they have good statistics". Except what we really have is a lack of data backing up the fancy non-informative charts (that clearly in no way shape or form correspond to the so-called millions of data points).
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      If you publish something, it's your responsibility to ensure what you write is true, to the extent reasonable within your skills and time available to you. Doing less is harmful to your own reputation at best, but can be harmful to whoever believes in the things you got wrong. Now that applies to mistakes. But for those who intentionally write and publish misinformation - I hope there's a special circle in hell waiting for them.
      - rexpop 10y ago
        > skills and time available to you Lots of plausible deniability, here.
    - colechristensen 10y ago
      It needs to be very clear from what and how you're presenting information the quality, source, and rigor of your data. This blog post is pretending to be true. I want to contrast it with this: another startup(ish) blog post about their own data https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-q1-2016/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-... That is a wonderful, useful, trustworthy source of interesting data. The post source seems like made-up marketing fluff pretending to be real information. I'm looking at graphs I entirely believe were made up, I have nothing to support the conclusions, and I'm very concerned that a less wary reader would think it's true.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  I wasn't being sarcastic, I was questioning the labeling of the use of charts and numbers as data journalism (This post is a good example of my current issues with modern data journalism as content marketing) in the comment I replied to. If it had said something like tools of data journalism I wouldn't have been inclined to reply. A small difference, but enough for me.
CamperBob2 10y ago
When a page starts popping up unsolicited chat boxes, the only conclusion I tend to reach is that they want me to go away. I'm happy to oblige.

geofft 10y ago

Am I missing the sarcasm at some point in this thread, or something? It's very clear to me that this is not journalism, and shouldn't be read with the expectation that it conforms to journalistic standards, any more than some observation on distributed systems on a personal blog should be read with the expectation that it conforms to scientific standards. It's a different type of content, which has a different kind of value. Are people trusting the claims the way they'd trust journalism from a known good media organization (or a paper from a known good research organization)?

colechristensen 10y ago
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it should follow journalistic standards. The fact that it obviously isn't is irrelevant. If you're going to pretend to be a journalist, do it right or don't do it at all.
- geofft 10y ago
  So, should I not post things about distributed systems to my blog without rigorous peer review, lest I get accused of pretending to be a scientist? (I'm genuinely confused about how this person is pretending to be a journalist. It doesn't look like journalism at all to me, starting from the part where it's on some startup's blog. What am I missing?)
  - minimaxir 10y ago
    There's a difference, IMO, between a blog post from a person in their spare time and a blog post by a startup whose main purpose is to get people to sign up for it.
    - rexpop 10y ago
      Less of a difference, IMO, than that between either of those blogs and a reputable journalistic outfit.
  - joatmon-snoo 10y ago
    I wouldn't argue the journalism point, but it's very clear that the blog post is an attempt to (1) present solid statistics and (2) bolster their own credibility because "they have good statistics". Except what we really have is a lack of data backing up the fancy non-informative charts (that clearly in no way shape or form correspond to the so-called millions of data points).
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    If you publish something, it's your responsibility to ensure what you write is true, to the extent reasonable within your skills and time available to you. Doing less is harmful to your own reputation at best, but can be harmful to whoever believes in the things you got wrong. Now that applies to mistakes. But for those who intentionally write and publish misinformation - I hope there's a special circle in hell waiting for them.
    - rexpop 10y ago
      > skills and time available to you Lots of plausible deniability, here.
  - colechristensen 10y ago
    It needs to be very clear from what and how you're presenting information the quality, source, and rigor of your data. This blog post is pretending to be true. I want to contrast it with this: another startup(ish) blog post about their own data https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-q1-2016/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-... That is a wonderful, useful, trustworthy source of interesting data. The post source seems like made-up marketing fluff pretending to be real information. I'm looking at graphs I entirely believe were made up, I have nothing to support the conclusions, and I'm very concerned that a less wary reader would think it's true.
maxerickson 10y ago
I wasn't being sarcastic, I was questioning the labeling of the use of charts and numbers as data journalism (This post is a good example of my current issues with modern data journalism as content marketing) in the comment I replied to. If it had said something like tools of data journalism I wouldn't have been inclined to reply. A small difference, but enough for me.

CamperBob2 10y ago

When a page starts popping up unsolicited chat boxes, the only conclusion I tend to reach is that they want me to go away. I'm happy to oblige.