4 ms·

Is it really the responsibility of a journalist to hold the hand of people not well versed in the topic at the expense of technical correctness? I don't think s

Is it really the responsibility of a journalist to hold the hand of people not well versed in the topic at the expense of technical correctness? I don't think so, I'd prefer we hold a standard of being correct and put the onus of education on the readers. They can Google what they don't understand. We can educate the public better to not be afraid of technical details. I agree with danarmak, this piece like so many others is just a bunch of sensationalized details. You should know what you're signing up for, nobody should be surprised by anything in there.

mrtksn 9y ago
>Is it really the responsibility of a journalist to hold the hand of people not well versed in the topic at the expense of technical correctness I think they don't have a choice but to do it this way. A typical news outlet will report on hundreds of topics a day and probably covering the entire spectrum of topics out there. How likely it is that all of the readers will be well versed in all the areas of expertise that human race was able to achieve in the last few thousands of years of recorded history? Also, these journalists[not necessarily this one but in general] are usually not experts on the topic that they write on and the better ones usually would consult with someone who is well versed on that topic. There's no way that the expert that the journalist is consulting with, will be able to educate the journalist, so he/she will dumb it down and then the reporter will dumb it down further and re-shape it in a form that the news outlet can sell it to its audience(right wing, left wing, alt-right, communist, highly educated ... whatever, they too are making a product for their customers).
- contextfree 9y ago
  In this case the author is not (yet? apparently he is hoping to do this kind of thing full-time) a professional journalist but someone who made a viral Twitter thread, which was picked up by the media and of which the article is a lightly edited version.
AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
>You should know what you're signing up for, nobody should be surprised by anything in there. I agree. People will deal with this responsibility the way they deal with any other responsibility that an individual faces. - Ignore it. Go on hoping that it doesn't affect them. Hoping that someone more capable is looking into it and will stop these companies from doing the wrong thing. - Realize the significance of what they are agreeing to, and try to deal with it. They may find themselves hopelessly inadequate to deal with the might of Google/Facebook/Amazon/Twitter/Microsoft/Reddit. They may decide to be a monk going into hiding in the woods of no social presence, or they would try to live with the risk while realizing that the risk is always going to be there. - Realize that the risk they knew about has materialized. They would realize that it has gone way beyond their respective abilities to handle it as an individual. They would try to band together and demand change. Class action lawsuits, and legal restrictions. We stopped telecom companies, credit card companies, mortgage companies, electrical, water, gas utilities from doing certain things as part of the law of the land. Internet services like Google/Amazon/Microsoft/Facebook/Twitter can get regulated. - Outsource the responsibility. Consumer Protection Boards. Regulatory bodies. Auditors. Laws with punishment to get desired behavior. I was surprised by the position of Google/Facebook/Amazon/Twitter/Microsoft/Reddit/Netflix on Net Neutrality, just the sheet hypocrisy of it. They jumped up and down about an ISP possibly deteriorating the user experience for monetary gains. While they have been applying their powers for anything they wish, including political gains and psyops, not just monetary gains but power. Why isn't Canadian Human Rights commissions jumping up and down over YouTube and Twitter accounts being silenced? Baker should bake the cake but YouTube shouldn't show the video? I guess, the Baker should simply come up with community guidelines and call it a day. This is too funny.

mrtksn 9y ago

>Is it really the responsibility of a journalist to hold the hand of people not well versed in the topic at the expense of technical correctness I think they don't have a choice but to do it this way. A typical news outlet will report on hundreds of topics a day and probably covering the entire spectrum of topics out there. How likely it is that all of the readers will be well versed in all the areas of expertise that human race was able to achieve in the last few thousands of years of recorded history? Also, these journalists[not necessarily this one but in general] are usually not experts on the topic that they write on and the better ones usually would consult with someone who is well versed on that topic. There's no way that the expert that the journalist is consulting with, will be able to educate the journalist, so he/she will dumb it down and then the reporter will dumb it down further and re-shape it in a form that the news outlet can sell it to its audience(right wing, left wing, alt-right, communist, highly educated ... whatever, they too are making a product for their customers).

contextfree 9y ago
In this case the author is not (yet? apparently he is hoping to do this kind of thing full-time) a professional journalist but someone who made a viral Twitter thread, which was picked up by the media and of which the article is a lightly edited version.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago

>You should know what you're signing up for, nobody should be surprised by anything in there. I agree. People will deal with this responsibility the way they deal with any other responsibility that an individual faces. - Ignore it. Go on hoping that it doesn't affect them. Hoping that someone more capable is looking into it and will stop these companies from doing the wrong thing. - Realize the significance of what they are agreeing to, and try to deal with it. They may find themselves hopelessly inadequate to deal with the might of Google/Facebook/Amazon/Twitter/Microsoft/Reddit. They may decide to be a monk going into hiding in the woods of no social presence, or they would try to live with the risk while realizing that the risk is always going to be there. - Realize that the risk they knew about has materialized. They would realize that it has gone way beyond their respective abilities to handle it as an individual. They would try to band together and demand change. Class action lawsuits, and legal restrictions. We stopped telecom companies, credit card companies, mortgage companies, electrical, water, gas utilities from doing certain things as part of the law of the land. Internet services like Google/Amazon/Microsoft/Facebook/Twitter can get regulated. - Outsource the responsibility. Consumer Protection Boards. Regulatory bodies. Auditors. Laws with punishment to get desired behavior. I was surprised by the position of Google/Facebook/Amazon/Twitter/Microsoft/Reddit/Netflix on Net Neutrality, just the sheet hypocrisy of it. They jumped up and down about an ISP possibly deteriorating the user experience for monetary gains. While they have been applying their powers for anything they wish, including political gains and psyops, not just monetary gains but power. Why isn't Canadian Human Rights commissions jumping up and down over YouTube and Twitter accounts being silenced? Baker should bake the cake but YouTube shouldn't show the video? I guess, the Baker should simply come up with community guidelines and call it a day. This is too funny.