2 ms·
So you just proved their point? Or is this indicative of journalism just kinda going under where you basically deny what someone said only to bolster their poin
by moomoo11 3y ago
So you just proved their point? Or is this indicative of journalism just kinda going under where you basically deny what someone said only to bolster their point.
You basically said it is to feel important (your branding, whatever) amongst your peers.
The general public doesn't care, you do though (what the person you're replying to said, and basically what you just reiterated). As a member of the general public that doesn't use twitter (I use nitter to view twitter, and I won't call it X), I feel that it is a massive echo chamber amplified by bots and fake engagement numbers.
- chaps 3y agoOi mate calm down, hey? You're twisting every aspect of my post to the point of satire. I never said anything about wanting to "feel important" amongst peers and your interpretation is.. strained, at best. I'm literally just talking about career growth here. Maybe take a deep breath and a break.
- moomoo11 3y agoSorry lol just being honest. I'm ESL so sometimes I guess my thoughts don't translate the best into english but I was just saying you refuted their statement only to bolster it, which I thought was odd coming from journalist. Cheers m8
- chaps 3y agoWasn't trying to bolster anything in any direction. Was just sharing what I've seen through a first-person lens. Good luck.
- petsfed 3y agoI understood it as "the way to show that you are a trustworthy journalist (and therefore attract both willing publishers and willing sources) is to be seen on e.g. Twitter/X, reporting things." So like, yes, there's a performative aspect that you do for other journalists, but its not solely that. Its not Linkedin for journalists. Its the equivalent of having a very robust github profile that's stacked with your own content.