3 ms·

Why you shouldn't read the news. They always want to create narratives and drama. And reshape how people see the world. Don't let journalists shape your view of

Why you shouldn't read the news. They always want to create narratives and drama. And reshape how people see the world. Don't let journalists shape your view of the world.

gumby 6y ago
Sounds cynical, but I have to admit I agree. My favorite kind of article is "X happened, here are some relevant circumstances, author (or ppl author spoke with) think significance and possible consequences are Y" Next favorite is "X happened" sometimes with a little context. Least favorite "Here's some stuff about person Z who had some exciting circumstances C. Along they way Z invented / discovered X." Either finishing there or "X will transform society, rendering it unrecognizable within three years. Meanwhile, Z is considering becoming a vegetarian and is also getting married within those exciting three years." Needless to say that least favorite is the most common. Even a listicle is better.
whoknew1122 6y ago
Everything in context. This was written by a journalist who writes specifically about internet culture.[1] The job of a cultural writer or critic is to provide alternate ideas to help broaden and shape your view of the world. This wasn't written by Woodward and Bernstein, or some hard-hitting give-me-the-facts-only political or business reporter. It's written by someone who specifically writes about culture. She writes the following: > "Unless your story ties into some larger cultural trend, or holds some type of important wider significance, I am not interested in covering it. And frankly, it’s not newsworthy." If the story being pitched doesn't tie into a larger cultural trend, it's not worth covering by a culture reporter. Someone's success can be newsworthy, but it has to impact the larger culture to be relevant to a reporter who specifically writes about culture. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz
- JasonFruit 6y ago
  Comments on the article from other journalists position it as, "and we all feel this way." Whether or not it was intended as a representation of journalistic attitudes in general, it has been upheld as one by other journalists.
- torgian 6y ago
  I feel like I’m old, because I don’t really understand what internet culture even is. Are they talking about memes, hackathons and such?
  - whoknew1122 6y ago
    It's not hard to find out what she writes about: https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz
- herewegoagain2 6y ago
  Fair enough, but I would still maintain that even for "internet culture", don't let journalists shape your views of it.
bjelkeman-again 6y ago
There is in my view quite a big difference in journalism culture around the world. I personally dislike the US style of every piece having to be a narrative before it gets to the meat of the story. Give me the news up front, then I can dive down deeper if I am interested.

Why you shouldn't read the news. They always want to create narratives and drama. And reshape how people see the world. Don't let journalists shape your view of the world.

gumby 6y ago

Sounds cynical, but I have to admit I agree. My favorite kind of article is "X happened, here are some relevant circumstances, author (or ppl author spoke with) think significance and possible consequences are Y" Next favorite is "X happened" sometimes with a little context. Least favorite "Here's some stuff about person Z who had some exciting circumstances C. Along they way Z invented / discovered X." Either finishing there or "X will transform society, rendering it unrecognizable within three years. Meanwhile, Z is considering becoming a vegetarian and is also getting married within those exciting three years." Needless to say that least favorite is the most common. Even a listicle is better.

whoknew1122 6y ago

Everything in context. This was written by a journalist who writes specifically about internet culture.[1] The job of a cultural writer or critic is to provide alternate ideas to help broaden and shape your view of the world. This wasn't written by Woodward and Bernstein, or some hard-hitting give-me-the-facts-only political or business reporter. It's written by someone who specifically writes about culture. She writes the following: > "Unless your story ties into some larger cultural trend, or holds some type of important wider significance, I am not interested in covering it. And frankly, it’s not newsworthy." If the story being pitched doesn't tie into a larger cultural trend, it's not worth covering by a culture reporter. Someone's success can be newsworthy, but it has to impact the larger culture to be relevant to a reporter who specifically writes about culture. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz

JasonFruit 6y ago
Comments on the article from other journalists position it as, "and we all feel this way." Whether or not it was intended as a representation of journalistic attitudes in general, it has been upheld as one by other journalists.
torgian 6y ago
I feel like I’m old, because I don’t really understand what internet culture even is. Are they talking about memes, hackathons and such?
- whoknew1122 6y ago
  It's not hard to find out what she writes about: https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz
herewegoagain2 6y ago
Fair enough, but I would still maintain that even for "internet culture", don't let journalists shape your views of it.

bjelkeman-again 6y ago

There is in my view quite a big difference in journalism culture around the world. I personally dislike the US style of every piece having to be a narrative before it gets to the meat of the story. Give me the news up front, then I can dive down deeper if I am interested.