3 ms·

Twitter, in and of itself, isn't exactly a platform for useful discourse. A journalist leaning to a certain end of a political spectrum starting a civil convers

Twitter, in and of itself, isn't exactly a platform for useful discourse. A journalist leaning to a certain end of a political spectrum starting a civil conversation with a journalist on the other end of the spectrum would likely lead to both of them getting accosted by readers asking why they're talking to "the enemy" or something like that. I do think journalists need to mix with circles that are out of their bubble. I don't, however, find Twitter to be the most crucial platform for that. Talk in person, communicate in opinion pieces and clash ideas. Just don't let it be filtered through hundreds of users shouting about how the other side is bad.

wittyreference 6y ago
Journalism as a public media profession is highly dependent on social currency for professional prospects. It’s one of the -last- professions that can risk being associated with the wrong tribe, in the current context of culture war. And I see little evidence that journalists are anything but bought-in.
luckylion 6y ago
I believe you're right: most Tweet that are ostensibly talk to somebody aren't meant to be read by them. They're meant to be read by the followers of the person tweeting. You could probably make it much more peaceful while losing nothing of what people use it for by putting all accounts into follower-only-mode. The different groups could scream at each other (and have their ingroup-rituals completed) without the other side ever even noticing that they're being screamed at.
pjc50 6y ago
One of the odd things about the news business is the kind of omerta that prevents journalists directly going at each other as political actors. There are a few exceptions; everyone feels comfortable abusing Owen Jones, for example. But even journalists and newspapers that get censured for inaccurate or distorted stories (e.g. https://hackinginquiry.org/press-release-islamophobia-times/ https://hackinginquiry.org/press-release-islamophobia-times/ ) don't become the story as much as they should. This is especially relevant when Spectator journalist Boris Johnson became Prime Minister, but evaded being interviewed on the BBC by Spectator chairman and BBC journalist Andrew Neil; or when Russian media oligarch and "Independent" owner Evgeny Lebedev was appointed to the UK's permanent unaccountable legislature, the House of Lords. In the UK, there is no boundary between journalism and party politics.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  There is plenty of criticism of Boris Johnson, and I do remember some of it from all the way back when he launched his run as mayor of London. If you are specifically asking for criticism of his columns at the time when he was a writer exclusively, I don't remember that part of ancient history. But it could see why there would be hesitation to engage with a columnist on a regular basis: it would be seen as attacking a rival, thus exposing you to accusations of financial motivations; it would be somewhat "meta", reinforcing accusation such as the one about the "journalistic bubble" isolated from the world. And his columns were clearly opinion pieces: if you're willing to publish a certain number of critiques of others' journalism, focussing on straight-news items with issues would seem to be more useful. It's precisely because Owen Jones openly acts as a political activist (speaking at party rallies etc) that criticism of him is fair game. I can see why people may be uncomfortable with these "dual loyalties", although it's not quite the end of democracy it is sometimes made out to be: all journalists have opinions, so what they seem to be arguing for is for those opinions to be hidden from view, which doesn't strike me as an improvement. Journalism being a route to political office makes a lot of sense, since these are obviously people interested and knowledgeable in it, trained in the specific skill to quickly familiarise themselves with new subjects, to remain conscious of the limits of their knowledge, and to find and recruit subject matter experts where necessary. Every country has its own set of common paths to political office. Law is very common for obvious reasons. Teachers figure prominently in some countries, possibly because they have the time, fall-back guarantees, and lots of local contacts. The US, alone among western country, has a tradition of military brass continuing into politics. Among all of these, journalism strikes me as the least problematic.
- frockington1 6y ago
  Wow, I was completely unaware of this. I had read of similar things in spy novels, but didn't think it actually happens in real life. Any other scandals/stories I should look up other than Evgeny Lebedev?
  - pjc50 6y ago
    > read of similar things in spy novels It's not really a spy novel when you do it in the open. You could try the "Russia report": https://docs.google.com/a/independent.gov.uk/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=aW5kZXBlbmRlbnQuZ292LnVrfGlzY3xneDo1Y2RhMGEyN2Y3NjM0OWFl https://docs.google.com/a/independent.gov.uk/viewer?a=v&pid=... If you like spy stuff, https://spyblog.org.uk/ https://spyblog.org.uk/ should be a regular read. Then there's the various murders; the Salisbury poisonings, Alexander Litvinenko, Sergei Magnitsky (for whom the Magnitsky act is named) etc. Probably useful to remember https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-investigations-206295a1-5abc-4573-be25-4da19d9adcc9.html https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-inv... and of course everyone associated with Maria Butina.

wittyreference 6y ago

Journalism as a public media profession is highly dependent on social currency for professional prospects. It’s one of the -last- professions that can risk being associated with the wrong tribe, in the current context of culture war. And I see little evidence that journalists are anything but bought-in.

luckylion 6y ago

I believe you're right: most Tweet that are ostensibly talk to somebody aren't meant to be read by them. They're meant to be read by the followers of the person tweeting. You could probably make it much more peaceful while losing nothing of what people use it for by putting all accounts into follower-only-mode. The different groups could scream at each other (and have their ingroup-rituals completed) without the other side ever even noticing that they're being screamed at.

pjc50 6y ago

One of the odd things about the news business is the kind of omerta that prevents journalists directly going at each other as political actors. There are a few exceptions; everyone feels comfortable abusing Owen Jones, for example. But even journalists and newspapers that get censured for inaccurate or distorted stories (e.g. https://hackinginquiry.org/press-release-islamophobia-times/ https://hackinginquiry.org/press-release-islamophobia-times/ ) don't become the story as much as they should. This is especially relevant when Spectator journalist Boris Johnson became Prime Minister, but evaded being interviewed on the BBC by Spectator chairman and BBC journalist Andrew Neil; or when Russian media oligarch and "Independent" owner Evgeny Lebedev was appointed to the UK's permanent unaccountable legislature, the House of Lords. In the UK, there is no boundary between journalism and party politics.

IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
There is plenty of criticism of Boris Johnson, and I do remember some of it from all the way back when he launched his run as mayor of London. If you are specifically asking for criticism of his columns at the time when he was a writer exclusively, I don't remember that part of ancient history. But it could see why there would be hesitation to engage with a columnist on a regular basis: it would be seen as attacking a rival, thus exposing you to accusations of financial motivations; it would be somewhat "meta", reinforcing accusation such as the one about the "journalistic bubble" isolated from the world. And his columns were clearly opinion pieces: if you're willing to publish a certain number of critiques of others' journalism, focussing on straight-news items with issues would seem to be more useful. It's precisely because Owen Jones openly acts as a political activist (speaking at party rallies etc) that criticism of him is fair game. I can see why people may be uncomfortable with these "dual loyalties", although it's not quite the end of democracy it is sometimes made out to be: all journalists have opinions, so what they seem to be arguing for is for those opinions to be hidden from view, which doesn't strike me as an improvement. Journalism being a route to political office makes a lot of sense, since these are obviously people interested and knowledgeable in it, trained in the specific skill to quickly familiarise themselves with new subjects, to remain conscious of the limits of their knowledge, and to find and recruit subject matter experts where necessary. Every country has its own set of common paths to political office. Law is very common for obvious reasons. Teachers figure prominently in some countries, possibly because they have the time, fall-back guarantees, and lots of local contacts. The US, alone among western country, has a tradition of military brass continuing into politics. Among all of these, journalism strikes me as the least problematic.
frockington1 6y ago
Wow, I was completely unaware of this. I had read of similar things in spy novels, but didn't think it actually happens in real life. Any other scandals/stories I should look up other than Evgeny Lebedev?
- pjc50 6y ago
  > read of similar things in spy novels It's not really a spy novel when you do it in the open. You could try the "Russia report": https://docs.google.com/a/independent.gov.uk/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=aW5kZXBlbmRlbnQuZ292LnVrfGlzY3xneDo1Y2RhMGEyN2Y3NjM0OWFl https://docs.google.com/a/independent.gov.uk/viewer?a=v&pid=... If you like spy stuff, https://spyblog.org.uk/ https://spyblog.org.uk/ should be a regular read. Then there's the various murders; the Salisbury poisonings, Alexander Litvinenko, Sergei Magnitsky (for whom the Magnitsky act is named) etc. Probably useful to remember https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-investigations-206295a1-5abc-4573-be25-4da19d9adcc9.html https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-inv... and of course everyone associated with Maria Butina.