4 ms·

Yeah it's a cute story but it's off the mark because more often than not nowadays the mainstream journalists ARE the rich and powerful. If you want to see jour

Yeah it's a cute story but it's off the mark because more often than not nowadays the mainstream journalists ARE the rich and powerful. If you want to see journalists actually performing the role of being checks on power, go to the third world. Bankrolled journalism isn't true journalism.

gumby 6y ago
> more often than not nowadays the mainstream journalists ARE the rich and powerful. Really? Very few, if any. People like Tucker Carlson have wealthy contracts but they don’t even consider themselves journalists, but entertainers (in his case he’s not part of the news division, for example).
- pochamago 6y ago
  Twenty percent of NYT writers attended an Ivy League school, which seems significant to me. https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume1_issue1/JoE_2018_1_1_Wai_Perina.html https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume1_issue1/J...
  - gumby 6y ago
    I do t know how many reporters you know but an Ivy League education doesn’t automatically make you rich. Especially if you become a reporter, social worked, public defender, or painter.
- nxmnxm99 6y ago
  Not individual personas, but the media organizations themselves. These aren't scrappy publications living in damp, ill-lit rooms exposing the evil villains of Gotham, these are multi billion dollar corporations with political ambitions. The job of modern "journalism" is no longer to inform - it's to influence. The individual players just tow the party line.
  - gumby 6y ago
    > The job of modern "journalism" is no longer to inform - it's to influence. Has the purpose of journalism ever been to “inform”? Seems it has always (well, going back for centuries at least) been to argue a point. I say this out of sympathy for journalists, not to condem them. > The individual players just tow the party line. Aren’t you contradicting yourself? If your aim is to influence the last thing you’d do is toe the line; rather you’d cross it without a thought.

gumby 6y ago

> more often than not nowadays the mainstream journalists ARE the rich and powerful. Really? Very few, if any. People like Tucker Carlson have wealthy contracts but they don’t even consider themselves journalists, but entertainers (in his case he’s not part of the news division, for example).

pochamago 6y ago
Twenty percent of NYT writers attended an Ivy League school, which seems significant to me. https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume1_issue1/JoE_2018_1_1_Wai_Perina.html https://www.journalofexpertise.org/articles/volume1_issue1/J...
- gumby 6y ago
  I do t know how many reporters you know but an Ivy League education doesn’t automatically make you rich. Especially if you become a reporter, social worked, public defender, or painter.
nxmnxm99 6y ago
Not individual personas, but the media organizations themselves. These aren't scrappy publications living in damp, ill-lit rooms exposing the evil villains of Gotham, these are multi billion dollar corporations with political ambitions. The job of modern "journalism" is no longer to inform - it's to influence. The individual players just tow the party line.
- gumby 6y ago
  > The job of modern "journalism" is no longer to inform - it's to influence. Has the purpose of journalism ever been to “inform”? Seems it has always (well, going back for centuries at least) been to argue a point. I say this out of sympathy for journalists, not to condem them. > The individual players just tow the party line. Aren’t you contradicting yourself? If your aim is to influence the last thing you’d do is toe the line; rather you’d cross it without a thought.