5 ms·
I won’t call some of these reporters journalists, they are more like activists. They aren’t interested in keeping society informed, they just want to push their
by verroq 6y ago
I won’t call some of these reporters journalists, they are more like activists. They aren’t interested in keeping society informed, they just want to push their agenda.
- goldenManatee 6y agoBa dam bum.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoThey're like that because that's what the current system rewards. I think that's why the user you replied to said what they did.
- pjc50 6y agoThe only worthwhile journalism is activism. Discomfort the powerful. Unfortunately it's dangerous to be too good at this, see Daphne Caruana Galizia.
- verroq 6y agoThe truth doesn’t have an agenda
- aww_dang 6y agoUnfortunately, truth hasn't published any articles. So far, only subjective views have been published by fallible humans.
- zarkov99 6y agoThe fact that something cannot be done perfectly is not a valid excuse to do it poolry.
- aww_dang 6y agoAgreed. However, it would be a good reason to hedge expectations accordingly. Everyone has a bias. Much of the current political acrimony could be avoided if both speakers and listeners acknowledged this. Instead we have appeals to 'truthiness' and 'fact-check' that defy the basic premises of human nature.
- zarkov99 6y agoI am not sure admiting that there is a bias would make any difference. Its plain to see. I think the fundamental problem is that the bias is the main thing now. It trumps everything, including decency, respect for your fellow citizen or the profession. Activism has become the mission. The people who think this is OK seem to lack the imagination to realize how quickly the BS firehose can turn towards when unencumbered by the facts.
- aww_dang 6y agoI'm not sure they are aware of what they are doing. It isn't hard to imagine them claiming they're only reporting 'the truth'. Deep convictions have a way of shaping perceptions. Partisan 'fact-check' outlets are a good example of this. An admission of bias would serve as a disclaimer and a reminder for the consumer of news. Integrating the disclaimer into the writing could actively influence how the article is written.
- zarkov99 6y agoThat is interesting. You do not think the people at CNN, NYT, WPro and Foxnews are aware of their biases? It seems so hard to believe.
- aww_dang 6y agoLet's take WaPo as an example. They changed their tagline to "Democracy dies in darkness" after Trump won. I imagine they know they don't like the guy, but in their minds it is justified. I suspect there's a fair proportion of their staff who believes enacting Godwin's law isn't hyperbole. For them, selectively misquoting the Charlottesville press conference isn't misleading, because they believe that they know the _truth_ about his intentions.
- zarkov99 6y agoSorry, that is exactly the attitude that got us into the mess we are in. I for one care very little for activists doing journalism. Just tell people the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth as best as you can ascertain it and let them make their own choices.
- maxerickson 6y agoIf you have 1 hour a week or even 1 hour a day, the truths you choose to tell will look just like activism.
- zarkov99 6y agoThen you should not be in journalism. It can't be done that way and what can be done that way is worse than useless.
- maxerickson 6y agoYou aren't really addressing what I am getting at. There's too much happening for the simple editorial decisions that go into choosing what to talk about for an hour to not end up looking like bias.
- zarkov99 6y agoMaybe that makes a little sense for live media. Maybe. But you cannot tell me the nyt or wpost do not have the resources for thoughtful editorialization.
- baggy_trough 6y agoWhat a destructive point of view. There is an enormous difference between activism and journalism.
- mensetmanusman 6y agoThis opinion is quite new. Unfortunately journalism has been coopted by such folks. We do need activists, but they don’t have to be journalists. Maybe these groups on youtube that are just filming things without interrupting with questions are the journalists of the future ... https://youtu.be/pW_jsS_JnMY https://youtu.be/pW_jsS_JnMY
- watwut 6y agoIt is not new, it is more of return back to where journalism started.
- pessimizer 6y agoI wouldn't call them journalists either, more like royal scribes speaking to a class of courtiers. Real journalists have agendas other than uncritically repeating what some unnamed intelligence source told them.