3 ms·

That's known as the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnesia-effect/ https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murr

That's known as the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnesia-effect/ https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnes...

globuous 10y ago
I agree with this so much. However, playing the devil's advocate, I guess it depends on the journalist's background. For instance, a poli-sci major writing about a scientific/tech topic will likely get a lot of things wrong. However, the same journalist might likely have a lot of interesting things to write about international politics, because that's what his background is about. that being said, I don't know how much journalist writing about politics have studied it in the past.
- beachstartup 10y ago
  my gut assumption is that most journalists have journalism or communications degrees, which seems to be corroborated by the data. https://books.google.com/books?id=KUyOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=degrees+held+by+journalists&source=bl&ots=yWXCzSYUgV&sig=agHimYej06oDWHFn_YjLW4S4E-0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigsK_y5ZHRAhWHsVQKHRUjAWQQ6AEISTAI#v=onepage&q=degrees%20held%20by%20journalists&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=KUyOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=P... not that it really matters, i have an econ degree but wouldn't call myself an economist by any stretch. the real issue, at least in the US, most news is really just either direct or indirect PR. curiously, i think 'X writer' is the term you are looking for. i.e., someone with a background in technology or fashion that reports on things is more likely to be called themselves a 'tech writer' or 'fashion writer'. it's almost like real experts don't even want to be called journalists. i certainly wouldn't. i've found that you're much more likely to find accurate reporting in industry-specific media rather than general media, because then at least the sources of funding and agenda are pretty clear.

That's known as the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnesia-effect/ https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnes...

globuous 10y ago

I agree with this so much. However, playing the devil's advocate, I guess it depends on the journalist's background. For instance, a poli-sci major writing about a scientific/tech topic will likely get a lot of things wrong. However, the same journalist might likely have a lot of interesting things to write about international politics, because that's what his background is about. that being said, I don't know how much journalist writing about politics have studied it in the past.

beachstartup 10y ago
my gut assumption is that most journalists have journalism or communications degrees, which seems to be corroborated by the data. https://books.google.com/books?id=KUyOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=degrees+held+by+journalists&source=bl&ots=yWXCzSYUgV&sig=agHimYej06oDWHFn_YjLW4S4E-0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigsK_y5ZHRAhWHsVQKHRUjAWQQ6AEISTAI#v=onepage&q=degrees%20held%20by%20journalists&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=KUyOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA42&lpg=P... not that it really matters, i have an econ degree but wouldn't call myself an economist by any stretch. the real issue, at least in the US, most news is really just either direct or indirect PR. curiously, i think 'X writer' is the term you are looking for. i.e., someone with a background in technology or fashion that reports on things is more likely to be called themselves a 'tech writer' or 'fashion writer'. it's almost like real experts don't even want to be called journalists. i certainly wouldn't. i've found that you're much more likely to find accurate reporting in industry-specific media rather than general media, because then at least the sources of funding and agenda are pretty clear.