5 ms·

Maybe I'm being nostalgic, but I don't see this type of open discussions in media today, where on the one hand you'll have a reputable, mainstream journalist an

Maybe I'm being nostalgic, but I don't see this type of open discussions in media today, where on the one hand you'll have a reputable, mainstream journalist and on the other you'll have someone who thinks so far out the box that you'll have to invent a new word before classifying them and what they produce, even though they come from different parts of the what-have-you spectrum, is pure intellectual brilliance that's bliss to consume. I miss that aspect of the past. Maybe I shouldn't but I do.

andy_ppp 5y ago
Hasn't it just moved to podcasts? You are right though, the traditional media just deals in half truths and artificially modifying information to suit whatever will make people click. "Orange juice (whatever) causes/cures cancer" or "some person said controversial thing" or "aggressive interviewer with an axe to grind" and actually when you go to the original sources in context this is very rarely justified or true. I actually think the lack of sourcing of things is horrendous when full versions of quoted interviews are usually available to be linked. And then there is the disingenuousness of the people who are attempting to appear in the media, they will literally say anything. I'm really not sure where we are when I trust most of the podcasts I listen to to tell me more accurate information than the BBC or CNN or Fox or The Times etc. but here we are.
- kreeben 5y ago
  >> traditional media just deals in half truths >> I trust most of the podcasts I listen to But so does pod casters, even Joe "Vitamin D" Rogan does it. Half-truths sell magazines. It seems we've created a society where being "right" and pointing fingers are highly lucrative ways of conducting ourselves. It seems we have forgotten the ways of the past where even the most unalike could find consensus around basic matters and have fruitful discussions around your point of view as well as mine, because we knew, we're both far from being 100% "right". The arrogance of the human race, it makes me so sad.
  - clord 5y ago
    > consensus around basic matters But the thing is Joe (and others) will have the conversations you’re describing- it’s not forgotten. Part of having a good conversation is being comfortable with being wrong. He’s explicit about being a joke comedian sports commentator, and can sympathetically talk with anyone. Conversations with ground rules of truth are those that tend to be dry and pre-processed. The listener can think too and figure out what makes sense. Part of what makes gonzo fun, too.
    - Aerroon 5y ago
      >Conversations with ground rules of truth are those that tend to be dry and pre-processed. Focusing too much on truth turns your conversations into legalese. People will be more focused on not being wrong than communicating useful information and ideas. Conversation happens in half-truths. You can't expect anyone to know all the ins and outs of everything they discuss - even scientists in their field of expertise. These half-truths are usually unintentional. The media has the problem of half-truths while seeming credible. In the modern media a news reporter reports on a protest and describes it as "mostly peaceful" while in the background you can see buildings on fire. This is an intentional half-truth, but it's branded with the media organization's credibility.
  - andy_ppp 5y ago
    There is a huge correlation between people low in Vitamin D and bad COVID-19 outcomes, correlation != causation, sure. It’s usually too late to expect giving vitamin D at the point of hospitalisation to expect it to help. I’m for most people taking vitamin d regularly for all sorts of reasons. I’d be much more circumspect about Ivermectin but the studies are being done now to see if it can help, to say it absolutely won’t work is unknown. I think promoting it is pretty bad personally and I don’t take my medical advice from Joe Rogan. Medcram is pretty informative though.
    - kreeben 5y ago
      >> huge correlation between people low in Vitamin D and bad COVID-19 outcomes >> correlation != causation Thank you for that perfect explanation of "what is half-truth".
- tomarr 5y ago
  >>traditional media just deals in half truths and artificially modifying information You know, this also could be a definition for Gonzo journalism which by its nature is 'truth inspired'.
  - alfl 5y ago
    Perhaps Gonzo has been industrialized: “when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.”
  - henvic 5y ago
    Unfortunately, most of traditional media is both really intertwined with government actors, and mostly interested in matters of politics, instead of sciences, technology, and more meaningful and informative things. News is, unfortunately, mostly propaganda and de facto marketing & public relations of government officials instead of about interesting topics you can learn from.
    - wombat-man 5y ago
      I mean, I guess? Just as an example NYT has entire sections about science, technology, art, travel. They're pretty mainstream. There's a lot of noise out there but there's still good journalism happening.
itisit 5y ago
Salisbury's clearly well-informed and knows how to ask a question without probing or catering to Thompson. Thompson is home at ease in his snow-covered Aspen hamlet. They're both journalists/writers with a mutual respect for one another and the craft. And the medium in that era was often there to capture a record of the proceedings, not to generate a product of it. It's not a lost art per se, but having all the great interview ingredients from what's on display in this video sure seem to be rare.

andy_ppp 5y ago

Hasn't it just moved to podcasts? You are right though, the traditional media just deals in half truths and artificially modifying information to suit whatever will make people click. "Orange juice (whatever) causes/cures cancer" or "some person said controversial thing" or "aggressive interviewer with an axe to grind" and actually when you go to the original sources in context this is very rarely justified or true. I actually think the lack of sourcing of things is horrendous when full versions of quoted interviews are usually available to be linked. And then there is the disingenuousness of the people who are attempting to appear in the media, they will literally say anything. I'm really not sure where we are when I trust most of the podcasts I listen to to tell me more accurate information than the BBC or CNN or Fox or The Times etc. but here we are.

kreeben 5y ago
>> traditional media just deals in half truths >> I trust most of the podcasts I listen to But so does pod casters, even Joe "Vitamin D" Rogan does it. Half-truths sell magazines. It seems we've created a society where being "right" and pointing fingers are highly lucrative ways of conducting ourselves. It seems we have forgotten the ways of the past where even the most unalike could find consensus around basic matters and have fruitful discussions around your point of view as well as mine, because we knew, we're both far from being 100% "right". The arrogance of the human race, it makes me so sad.
- clord 5y ago
  > consensus around basic matters But the thing is Joe (and others) will have the conversations you’re describing- it’s not forgotten. Part of having a good conversation is being comfortable with being wrong. He’s explicit about being a joke comedian sports commentator, and can sympathetically talk with anyone. Conversations with ground rules of truth are those that tend to be dry and pre-processed. The listener can think too and figure out what makes sense. Part of what makes gonzo fun, too.
  - Aerroon 5y ago
    >Conversations with ground rules of truth are those that tend to be dry and pre-processed. Focusing too much on truth turns your conversations into legalese. People will be more focused on not being wrong than communicating useful information and ideas. Conversation happens in half-truths. You can't expect anyone to know all the ins and outs of everything they discuss - even scientists in their field of expertise. These half-truths are usually unintentional. The media has the problem of half-truths while seeming credible. In the modern media a news reporter reports on a protest and describes it as "mostly peaceful" while in the background you can see buildings on fire. This is an intentional half-truth, but it's branded with the media organization's credibility.
- andy_ppp 5y ago
  There is a huge correlation between people low in Vitamin D and bad COVID-19 outcomes, correlation != causation, sure. It’s usually too late to expect giving vitamin D at the point of hospitalisation to expect it to help. I’m for most people taking vitamin d regularly for all sorts of reasons. I’d be much more circumspect about Ivermectin but the studies are being done now to see if it can help, to say it absolutely won’t work is unknown. I think promoting it is pretty bad personally and I don’t take my medical advice from Joe Rogan. Medcram is pretty informative though.
  - kreeben 5y ago
    >> huge correlation between people low in Vitamin D and bad COVID-19 outcomes >> correlation != causation Thank you for that perfect explanation of "what is half-truth".
tomarr 5y ago
>>traditional media just deals in half truths and artificially modifying information You know, this also could be a definition for Gonzo journalism which by its nature is 'truth inspired'.
- alfl 5y ago
  Perhaps Gonzo has been industrialized: “when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.”
- henvic 5y ago
  Unfortunately, most of traditional media is both really intertwined with government actors, and mostly interested in matters of politics, instead of sciences, technology, and more meaningful and informative things. News is, unfortunately, mostly propaganda and de facto marketing & public relations of government officials instead of about interesting topics you can learn from.
  - wombat-man 5y ago
    I mean, I guess? Just as an example NYT has entire sections about science, technology, art, travel. They're pretty mainstream. There's a lot of noise out there but there's still good journalism happening.

itisit 5y ago

Salisbury's clearly well-informed and knows how to ask a question without probing or catering to Thompson. Thompson is home at ease in his snow-covered Aspen hamlet. They're both journalists/writers with a mutual respect for one another and the craft. And the medium in that era was often there to capture a record of the proceedings, not to generate a product of it. It's not a lost art per se, but having all the great interview ingredients from what's on display in this video sure seem to be rare.