3 ms·

That all headlines are not contextualized to the US is why you hate journalism?

tdb7893 3y ago
Journalism has its flaws but my experience is that some people just want to hate on journalists and will use every excuse. Edit: it's also a little funny to see people who work in tech throwing stones at journalists
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  I have some empathy because a lot of "journalists" writing the news aren't actually journalists by trade or training, but rather marketing or "social media gurus" or similar nonsense that hasn't taught you how to judge source material, and because they are under immense pressure to do more with less than their ancestors, so nearly every article is just someone else's press release with a little flair added. In many ways, journalism of today is empirically worse off and less useful than journalism of yesterday, simply due to it's seeming takeover by marketing types who have a lose understanding of what we should consider "truth" because they like to make money. But it's so insane when people act like we didn't go to war with spain in 1890s over a supposed attack on our warship that DID NOT HAPPEN, and then didn't increase our involvement in war with vietnam over a supposed attack on our warship that DID NOT HAPPEN, and then we didn't go bomb the desert for two decades because they were full of supposed WMDs that DID NOT EXIST. Yellow journalism is older than your grandparents.
Dalewyn 3y ago
No, I hate headlines that are unnecessarily vague or misleading. "Canada wants to ban the Flipper Zero" would have been the same word count and infinitely more descriptive. Also, I'm not going to read the contents of every bloody article. Especially if the contents don't particularly interest me. Headlines exist for easy and reasonably accurate summarization, which this one fails to do.
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  You don’t have to read the article. The sub headline includes the context of the country being Canada. “Canada is moving to ban the TikTok-famous Flipper Zero, claiming that it contributes to car thefts. It doesn’t.” The least you could do is refrain from commenting on articles that you haven’t even clicked on.
  - Repulsion9513 3y ago
    The least the article could do is make it clear before I click, that I don't need to click on it because it's the same news I already read days ago... especially since I am passingly familiar with Vice and know they have a significant amount of US coverage as well. But then they wouldn't get clicks that are ultimately worthless to literally everyone involved except for them!
- autoexec 3y ago
  Yeah, but by being vague they don't lose the clicks from anyone who would think "Not my country so no need to read about it!" - this way they can instill a sense of panic/indignation in everyone no matter what English speaking country with "Feds" they are in.
bluGill 3y ago
This is vice.com not vice.ca. If Vice.ca said the feds I'd assume Canada. A .com I shouldn't know at all what it refers to, but given that almost nothing is in .us I generally assume .com means US. Context is very important, and the context implies US so it is important to specify.
- saint_fiasco 3y ago
  > given that almost nothing is in .us I generally assume .com means US. Wait, that doesn't follow. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. In fact, most rectangles aren't squares.
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  .com is used in Canada and the entire rest of the world as well. It doesn't belong exclusively to the US by right or by custom.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    By custom other countries use their own country code much more often. You are correct .com does not actually belong to the us.
nnnnnnnnnn 3y ago
That headlines are purposefully vague to generate more clicks is why he hates journalism.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Journalism has its flaws but my experience is that some people just want to hate on journalists and will use every excuse. Edit: it's also a little funny to see people who work in tech throwing stones at journalists

mrguyorama 3y ago
I have some empathy because a lot of "journalists" writing the news aren't actually journalists by trade or training, but rather marketing or "social media gurus" or similar nonsense that hasn't taught you how to judge source material, and because they are under immense pressure to do more with less than their ancestors, so nearly every article is just someone else's press release with a little flair added. In many ways, journalism of today is empirically worse off and less useful than journalism of yesterday, simply due to it's seeming takeover by marketing types who have a lose understanding of what we should consider "truth" because they like to make money. But it's so insane when people act like we didn't go to war with spain in 1890s over a supposed attack on our warship that DID NOT HAPPEN, and then didn't increase our involvement in war with vietnam over a supposed attack on our warship that DID NOT HAPPEN, and then we didn't go bomb the desert for two decades because they were full of supposed WMDs that DID NOT EXIST. Yellow journalism is older than your grandparents.

Dalewyn 3y ago

No, I hate headlines that are unnecessarily vague or misleading. "Canada wants to ban the Flipper Zero" would have been the same word count and infinitely more descriptive. Also, I'm not going to read the contents of every bloody article. Especially if the contents don't particularly interest me. Headlines exist for easy and reasonably accurate summarization, which this one fails to do.

dghlsakjg 3y ago
You don’t have to read the article. The sub headline includes the context of the country being Canada. “Canada is moving to ban the TikTok-famous Flipper Zero, claiming that it contributes to car thefts. It doesn’t.” The least you could do is refrain from commenting on articles that you haven’t even clicked on.
- Repulsion9513 3y ago
  The least the article could do is make it clear before I click, that I don't need to click on it because it's the same news I already read days ago... especially since I am passingly familiar with Vice and know they have a significant amount of US coverage as well. But then they wouldn't get clicks that are ultimately worthless to literally everyone involved except for them!
autoexec 3y ago
Yeah, but by being vague they don't lose the clicks from anyone who would think "Not my country so no need to read about it!" - this way they can instill a sense of panic/indignation in everyone no matter what English speaking country with "Feds" they are in.

bluGill 3y ago

This is vice.com not vice.ca. If Vice.ca said the feds I'd assume Canada. A .com I shouldn't know at all what it refers to, but given that almost nothing is in .us I generally assume .com means US. Context is very important, and the context implies US so it is important to specify.

saint_fiasco 3y ago
> given that almost nothing is in .us I generally assume .com means US. Wait, that doesn't follow. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. In fact, most rectangles aren't squares.
dghlsakjg 3y ago
.com is used in Canada and the entire rest of the world as well. It doesn't belong exclusively to the US by right or by custom.
- bluGill 3y ago
  By custom other countries use their own country code much more often. You are correct .com does not actually belong to the us.

nnnnnnnnnn 3y ago

That headlines are purposefully vague to generate more clicks is why he hates journalism.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]