4 ms·

Don't read news, go on YouTube and watch clips from everyday average person living or traveling to any area you are interested in. News has failed me for 5 year

Don't read news, go on YouTube and watch clips from everyday average person living or traveling to any area you are interested in. News has failed me for 5 years, with YouTube and everything, I don't need these journalist

tablespoon 5y ago
> Don't read news, go on YouTube and watch clips from everyday average person living or traveling to any area you are interested in. News has failed me for 5 years, with YouTube and everything, I don't need these journalist This idea has some pretty serious flaws: 1. An "average traveler" is not a competent person to really dig into the truth somewhere, especially if it's hidden. Sure, they can give you a good idea of what an average traveler's experience is, but that's pretty atypical and will not answer many journalistic-type questions (e.g. an average travller to France is going to tell you a lot about the Louvre and Eiffel Tower, not so much about the banlieues or Yellow Vests). 2. Where are your Youtube video clips of an average person living in North Korea? If Youtube existed in 1938, what do you think the video clips of an average ethnic German would have told you about Germany? Many people are prevented from speaking publicly, and others will just report the local conventional wisdom, full of the typical local biases and falsehoods. That's not to say that one can't find out something important for either of these groups, but that will almost certainly be by chance and not give you anywhere approaching a complete picture. Most people who reject journalism just go on to re-invent it badly, with worse flaws than what they rejected.
- justicezyx 5y ago
  > would have told you about Germany? They'll tell you the Hitler guy is mobilizing nationalism and preparing for military expansion. That certainly can help Chamberlain avoiding his fatal wrong assessment. And your reasoning of YT video non reliable, because of needing investigation and information is hidden. That's a very flawed idea. There are 2 kinds of events, those happening on a large scale, like genocide; and those happen covertly in covert surrounding, like an assisnation, gang activity. For the second kind, of course random YouTuber is not going to get the information. But for the first kind, of course a random Youtuber is plently informative. Not because he cannot be disguised, but he see the activities on the ground. Your main steam media are just rehashing the taking point from some authoritative sources. They essentially are a form of entertainment. That's why news anchors are paid as movie stars. US media is the worst kind of media. They are setup from ground up to seek profit. And we all know what that eventually leads to...
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > But for the first kind, of course a random Youtuber is plently informative. Not because he cannot be disguised, but he see the activities on the ground. I actually did make that same point: >> That's not to say that one can't find out something important for either of these groups, but that will almost certainly be by chance and not give you anywhere approaching a complete picture. My point isn't that a random Youtuber can't have something important to say or show, it's that they're not a replacement for journalism. Also, it's important to keep in mind that the "random youtuber" style can and has been faked for manipulative purposes. > Your main steam media are just rehashing the taking point from some authoritative sources. They essentially are a form of entertainment. That's why news anchors are paid as movie stars. Eh, that's true sometimes, but it's not really the kind of journalism I'm talking about here (more investigative journalism and critical synthesis). Also, you've been all about boots on the ground and I think I actually posted an account from a journalist who described what that's like in Xinjiang. That's not an anchorman reading off a teleprompter. > US media is the worst kind of media. They are setup from ground up to seek profit. And we all know what that eventually leads to... That's a pretty inaccurate generalization. US media spans a wide from PBS News Hour and NPR to the New York Times to the New York Post and Fox News opinion blowhards. That take also seems to ignore things like advertising/news and news/opinion firewalls. And what's better? Media by people with an ideological axe to grind?
    - justicezyx 5y ago
      > I actually did make that same point: Yes, I am sorry, I think it's error prone to read comments for such complicated matters.

tablespoon 5y ago

> Don't read news, go on YouTube and watch clips from everyday average person living or traveling to any area you are interested in. News has failed me for 5 years, with YouTube and everything, I don't need these journalist This idea has some pretty serious flaws: 1. An "average traveler" is not a competent person to really dig into the truth somewhere, especially if it's hidden. Sure, they can give you a good idea of what an average traveler's experience is, but that's pretty atypical and will not answer many journalistic-type questions (e.g. an average travller to France is going to tell you a lot about the Louvre and Eiffel Tower, not so much about the banlieues or Yellow Vests). 2. Where are your Youtube video clips of an average person living in North Korea? If Youtube existed in 1938, what do you think the video clips of an average ethnic German would have told you about Germany? Many people are prevented from speaking publicly, and others will just report the local conventional wisdom, full of the typical local biases and falsehoods. That's not to say that one can't find out something important for either of these groups, but that will almost certainly be by chance and not give you anywhere approaching a complete picture. Most people who reject journalism just go on to re-invent it badly, with worse flaws than what they rejected.

justicezyx 5y ago
> would have told you about Germany? They'll tell you the Hitler guy is mobilizing nationalism and preparing for military expansion. That certainly can help Chamberlain avoiding his fatal wrong assessment. And your reasoning of YT video non reliable, because of needing investigation and information is hidden. That's a very flawed idea. There are 2 kinds of events, those happening on a large scale, like genocide; and those happen covertly in covert surrounding, like an assisnation, gang activity. For the second kind, of course random YouTuber is not going to get the information. But for the first kind, of course a random Youtuber is plently informative. Not because he cannot be disguised, but he see the activities on the ground. Your main steam media are just rehashing the taking point from some authoritative sources. They essentially are a form of entertainment. That's why news anchors are paid as movie stars. US media is the worst kind of media. They are setup from ground up to seek profit. And we all know what that eventually leads to...
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > But for the first kind, of course a random Youtuber is plently informative. Not because he cannot be disguised, but he see the activities on the ground. I actually did make that same point: >> That's not to say that one can't find out something important for either of these groups, but that will almost certainly be by chance and not give you anywhere approaching a complete picture. My point isn't that a random Youtuber can't have something important to say or show, it's that they're not a replacement for journalism. Also, it's important to keep in mind that the "random youtuber" style can and has been faked for manipulative purposes. > Your main steam media are just rehashing the taking point from some authoritative sources. They essentially are a form of entertainment. That's why news anchors are paid as movie stars. Eh, that's true sometimes, but it's not really the kind of journalism I'm talking about here (more investigative journalism and critical synthesis). Also, you've been all about boots on the ground and I think I actually posted an account from a journalist who described what that's like in Xinjiang. That's not an anchorman reading off a teleprompter. > US media is the worst kind of media. They are setup from ground up to seek profit. And we all know what that eventually leads to... That's a pretty inaccurate generalization. US media spans a wide from PBS News Hour and NPR to the New York Times to the New York Post and Fox News opinion blowhards. That take also seems to ignore things like advertising/news and news/opinion firewalls. And what's better? Media by people with an ideological axe to grind?
  - justicezyx 5y ago
    > I actually did make that same point: Yes, I am sorry, I think it's error prone to read comments for such complicated matters.