4 ms·
To me, this reads like someone saying "You don't need graphs if you have the raw data" Journalists, in their true form, turn data into information. That is mo
by droopyEyelids 8y ago
To me, this reads like someone saying "You don't need graphs if you have the raw data"
Journalists, in their true form, turn data into information.
That is more important than ever in our context free world of video snippets and misleading quotes.
- ravenstine 8y agoI do agree that we need raw data. Sadly, we're not getting enough of it, and part of the cause is the speed of the news cycle; it's far more expedient for someone to write prose than spend the time gathering raw data, making sense of it, and distilling that data into graphs.
- jvagner 8y agomy latest theory is that people like participating in the news cycle more than they are inclined to consume it. click-bait and fake news lets people instantly rage / share, where as good journalism would be valuable to people who want to pause, comprehend and have an outlet that isn't just sharing, raging, etc. which is probably why even big brand journalism hasn't really changed. the list of outlets that i block on twitter and apple news (the latest of which is forbes, for yet another installment in their "latest iPhone update has a NASTY SURPRISE" articles) grows weekly, but i can't get out of the clickbait content tsunami.
- ravenstine 8y ago> my latest theory is that people like participating in the news cycle more than they are inclined to consume it. That's an interesting observation. It seems like how most people who watch sports have little to no interest in playing themselves, even recreationally, but they "join" a team because of the sense of participation they get. Not sure if that's the best analogy, but it's reminiscent for me.