4 ms·

Describing journalists concerned about bigoted communities present on your platform as "a mob" is certainly a hot take.

Karunamon 6y ago
Allow me to add one of my own: Journalists' jobs aren't to share their "concerns", it's to report the facts. So much of the media's pathology is a result of the problem that news doesn't even try to be impartial anymore. If you want to "share your concerns", the place to do that is an op-ed, or a blog post, or twitter, or something. But it isn't journalism anymore.
- adrianN 6y ago
  News never was impartial. Just by selecting what to report and the order in which you report things you influence the reception of the world. I'd argue that it's impossible to have objective news.
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    That's not what I'm talking about here. We've gone beyond mere story selection to actual agenda-pushing. I.e punditry, not journalism.
buzzkillington 6y ago
Not really. The yellow press has been creating violent controversies ever since the printing press was invented. That they have moved on from urging the burning of heretics and infidels alive to making sure racists and bigots can't afford food and shelter is progress of a sort, but not one I would have chosen. Still I might be speaking too soon. I wouldn't put it past them to reinvent the 30 Years War over which race is more virtuous for more clicks.
missosoup 6y ago
The word 'bigoted' is getting thrown around all over the place in this post and most commenters, including this one, seem to have never actually looked it up in the dictionary. Bigoted does not mean right-wing, objectionable, or things one disagrees with. Bigoted means unwilling to change one's opinion. Which certainly applies to the hard left wing end of the spectrum just as much as it does to hard right. Bigoted: obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, and intolerant towards other people's beliefs and practices. If anything, so-called journalists using a platform to express 'concern' over things they disagree with is a better fit for the term. The job of a journalist is to report, not to preach their own brand of politics or dislikes or concerns.
- eeZah7Ux 6y ago
  > The word 'bigoted' is getting thrown around all over the place in this post and most commenters, including this one, seem to have never actually looked it up in the dictionary. On the contrary: """One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.""" It applies very well to people intolerant of other groups, ethnicity or race.
  - missosoup 6y ago
    It's not restricted to ethnicity, groups or race. Bigotry is merely the refusal to entertain different beliefs; whatever their groupby factor may be. Cherry-picking parts of the definition to meet one's idea of what it 'should' be, is the actual meaning of bigotry. Please refer to the Oxford dictionary definition if you're still confused.
    - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
      Everybody can see what little game you are playing.
  - secondcoming 6y ago
    Well, I guess there's a little bit of a bigot in everyone! It may sound like an insult but really isn't.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  No. > Definition of bigot > : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices > especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
  - missosoup 6y ago
    Not sure what the 'no' is in regard to. That's entirely aligned to my comment. Or did you think obstinate devotion to opinions and prejudices only manifests in the the group of people you happen to disagree with?

Allow me to add one of my own: Journalists' jobs aren't to share their "concerns", it's to report the facts. So much of the media's pathology is a result of the problem that news doesn't even try to be impartial anymore. If you want to "share your concerns", the place to do that is an op-ed, or a blog post, or twitter, or something. But it isn't journalism anymore.

adrianN 6y ago
News never was impartial. Just by selecting what to report and the order in which you report things you influence the reception of the world. I'd argue that it's impossible to have objective news.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  That's not what I'm talking about here. We've gone beyond mere story selection to actual agenda-pushing. I.e punditry, not journalism.

buzzkillington 6y ago

Not really. The yellow press has been creating violent controversies ever since the printing press was invented. That they have moved on from urging the burning of heretics and infidels alive to making sure racists and bigots can't afford food and shelter is progress of a sort, but not one I would have chosen. Still I might be speaking too soon. I wouldn't put it past them to reinvent the 30 Years War over which race is more virtuous for more clicks.

missosoup 6y ago

The word 'bigoted' is getting thrown around all over the place in this post and most commenters, including this one, seem to have never actually looked it up in the dictionary. Bigoted does not mean right-wing, objectionable, or things one disagrees with. Bigoted means unwilling to change one's opinion. Which certainly applies to the hard left wing end of the spectrum just as much as it does to hard right. Bigoted: obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, and intolerant towards other people's beliefs and practices. If anything, so-called journalists using a platform to express 'concern' over things they disagree with is a better fit for the term. The job of a journalist is to report, not to preach their own brand of politics or dislikes or concerns.

eeZah7Ux 6y ago
> The word 'bigoted' is getting thrown around all over the place in this post and most commenters, including this one, seem to have never actually looked it up in the dictionary. On the contrary: """One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.""" It applies very well to people intolerant of other groups, ethnicity or race.
- missosoup 6y ago
  It's not restricted to ethnicity, groups or race. Bigotry is merely the refusal to entertain different beliefs; whatever their groupby factor may be. Cherry-picking parts of the definition to meet one's idea of what it 'should' be, is the actual meaning of bigotry. Please refer to the Oxford dictionary definition if you're still confused.
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    Everybody can see what little game you are playing.
- secondcoming 6y ago
  Well, I guess there's a little bit of a bigot in everyone! It may sound like an insult but really isn't.
TulliusCicero 6y ago
No. > Definition of bigot > : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices > especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
- missosoup 6y ago
  Not sure what the 'no' is in regard to. That's entirely aligned to my comment. Or did you think obstinate devotion to opinions and prejudices only manifests in the the group of people you happen to disagree with?