4 ms·

> At least present news as it is? This is exceptionally difficult. My favorite example is choosing which photo to run for a story. Let's say a photographer tak

> At least present news as it is? This is exceptionally difficult. My favorite example is choosing which photo to run for a story. Let's say a photographer take photos of Trump at an event. He has a photo of Trump smiling, a photo of Trump frowning, a photo of Trump scowling and a photo of Trump laughing. Which one is correct? They are all technically correct because they happened, but they all convey different tones, some of which will be completely inappropriate in the context of the story it runs with.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago
Exactly. There was a very famous image of the UK miner's strike, at the battle of Orgreave, 1984. Another photographer captured the same scene that day. They give a very different impression. Both images compared: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/dec/06/photographers-scrum-winning-image-picture https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/dec/06/photogr...
- Aeolun 8y ago
  I don’t get why people fall over themselves to point out the differences in these images. They both seems fairly neural to me. It’s just that one doesn’t give much context, it’s just a miner.
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    One shows a miner and cop each grinning slightly. In the other, the same pair appear to be eyeballing each other. The second seems much more confrontational, to me anyway.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    Another problem with that example, at least for me, is that it is not apparent who is looking at who. It's a two dimensional photo and the depth of field is enough that you can't really tell which cop the miner is looking at.
rjf72 8y ago
I think this is a common objection, but is it really so reasonable? Why show any image of ephemeral emotion at all? If you must include not strictly necessary multimedia, something that would be obvious would be a long range wide-angle picture of the entire venue. It's similar to when people try to claim that journalism without bias in writing is not possible. No, it's very possible. See articles of the New York Times from decades ago. This [1] is the first article on what would become "Watergate" from the NYTimes. The article does nothing but provide a detailed and objective recounting of all information available. There is no speculation, and I certainly can't tell anything about the author's biases, political leanings, etc. And keep in mind that this is a huge event - that is what would eventually lead to the impeachment of Richard Nixon. That tempered and impartial reporting, over decades, is what gave the New York Times the reputation that it's rapidly destroying today. Imagine if that article was written by the New New York Times of today. The problem of course is that that article is 'boring'. It's not going to drive a million clicks and be shared on social media sites getting those upvotes to get to the top which leads to even more clicks and even more money. Hacker News is definitely higher brow than most social media sites. Regardless, this [2] is a list of all submissions to this site from the New York Times. Go and see what gets upvoted and eventually makes its way to the front page (following are all 30+ point submissions from first page): - Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing (nytimes.com) - Opinion: A.I. Could Worsen Health Disparities (nytimes.com) - Locast, a Free App Streaming Network TV, Would Love to Get Sued (nytimes.com) - This is Your Brain Off Facebook - study offers glimpse of unplugging (nytimes.com) - Another Side of MeToo: Male Managers Fearful of Mentoring Women (nytimes.com) - Foxconn Is Reconsidering Plan for Manufacturing in Wisconsin (nytimes.com) And so on. It's frequently sensationalized and hyperbolic reporting that often even starts the ball rolling with a fake title. No, AI isn't going to worsen health disparities. No, no company wants to get sued. And no, male managers are not fearful of mentoring women. And it's only downhill from there. Even the articles that seem real, often quickly expose they're just click grabbers. For instance the "Foxconn is reconsidering plan" states. The lead paragraph states, "It was heralded a year and a half ago as the start of a Midwestern manufacturing renaissance: Foxconn, the Taiwanese electronics behemoth, would build a $10 billion Wisconsin plant to make flat-screen televisions, creating 13,000 jobs. President Trump later called the project “the eighth wonder of the world.” Now that prospect looks less certain." Several paragraphs later you get, "Foxconn said that it remained committed to creating 13,000 jobs in Wisconsin and that it was “moving forward with plans to build an advanced manufacturing facility.”" In other words they are doing what they said they would do. This is not meaningful or good reporting. But it gets those clicks, and that's all that matters now a days. [1] - https://www.nytimes.com/1972/06/22/archives/4-being-hunted-in-inquiry-into-raid-on-democrats-4-hunted-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/06/22/archives/4-being-hunted-i... [2] - https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com
dingaling 8y ago
Use a montage of all four. That conveys the range of emotions of the event. The journalistic emphasis in selecting just one ( viewpoint, photo,lede ) is partly why the news is so broken.
mulmen 8y ago
Then only run a photo if it helps explain the facts, otherwise who needs it? If the photo supports the central truth of the piece then run it, otherwise you’re undermining yourself.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

Exactly. There was a very famous image of the UK miner's strike, at the battle of Orgreave, 1984. Another photographer captured the same scene that day. They give a very different impression. Both images compared: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/dec/06/photographers-scrum-winning-image-picture https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/dec/06/photogr...

Aeolun 8y ago
I don’t get why people fall over themselves to point out the differences in these images. They both seems fairly neural to me. It’s just that one doesn’t give much context, it’s just a miner.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  One shows a miner and cop each grinning slightly. In the other, the same pair appear to be eyeballing each other. The second seems much more confrontational, to me anyway.
- ams6110 8y ago
  Another problem with that example, at least for me, is that it is not apparent who is looking at who. It's a two dimensional photo and the depth of field is enough that you can't really tell which cop the miner is looking at.

rjf72 8y ago

I think this is a common objection, but is it really so reasonable? Why show any image of ephemeral emotion at all? If you must include not strictly necessary multimedia, something that would be obvious would be a long range wide-angle picture of the entire venue. It's similar to when people try to claim that journalism without bias in writing is not possible. No, it's very possible. See articles of the New York Times from decades ago. This [1] is the first article on what would become "Watergate" from the NYTimes. The article does nothing but provide a detailed and objective recounting of all information available. There is no speculation, and I certainly can't tell anything about the author's biases, political leanings, etc. And keep in mind that this is a huge event - that is what would eventually lead to the impeachment of Richard Nixon. That tempered and impartial reporting, over decades, is what gave the New York Times the reputation that it's rapidly destroying today. Imagine if that article was written by the New New York Times of today. The problem of course is that that article is 'boring'. It's not going to drive a million clicks and be shared on social media sites getting those upvotes to get to the top which leads to even more clicks and even more money. Hacker News is definitely higher brow than most social media sites. Regardless, this [2] is a list of all submissions to this site from the New York Times. Go and see what gets upvoted and eventually makes its way to the front page (following are all 30+ point submissions from first page): - Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing (nytimes.com) - Opinion: A.I. Could Worsen Health Disparities (nytimes.com) - Locast, a Free App Streaming Network TV, Would Love to Get Sued (nytimes.com) - This is Your Brain Off Facebook - study offers glimpse of unplugging (nytimes.com) - Another Side of MeToo: Male Managers Fearful of Mentoring Women (nytimes.com) - Foxconn Is Reconsidering Plan for Manufacturing in Wisconsin (nytimes.com) And so on. It's frequently sensationalized and hyperbolic reporting that often even starts the ball rolling with a fake title. No, AI isn't going to worsen health disparities. No, no company wants to get sued. And no, male managers are not fearful of mentoring women. And it's only downhill from there. Even the articles that seem real, often quickly expose they're just click grabbers. For instance the "Foxconn is reconsidering plan" states. The lead paragraph states, "It was heralded a year and a half ago as the start of a Midwestern manufacturing renaissance: Foxconn, the Taiwanese electronics behemoth, would build a $10 billion Wisconsin plant to make flat-screen televisions, creating 13,000 jobs. President Trump later called the project “the eighth wonder of the world.” Now that prospect looks less certain." Several paragraphs later you get, "Foxconn said that it remained committed to creating 13,000 jobs in Wisconsin and that it was “moving forward with plans to build an advanced manufacturing facility.”" In other words they are doing what they said they would do. This is not meaningful or good reporting. But it gets those clicks, and that's all that matters now a days. [1] - https://www.nytimes.com/1972/06/22/archives/4-being-hunted-in-inquiry-into-raid-on-democrats-4-hunted-in.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/06/22/archives/4-being-hunted-i... [2] - https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com

dingaling 8y ago

Use a montage of all four. That conveys the range of emotions of the event. The journalistic emphasis in selecting just one ( viewpoint, photo,lede ) is partly why the news is so broken.

mulmen 8y ago

Then only run a photo if it helps explain the facts, otherwise who needs it? If the photo supports the central truth of the piece then run it, otherwise you’re undermining yourself.