3 ms·

"Journalists" now love to use a sequence of events and then present them like a causal narrative, ignoring the real reason the final event happened. I'm so fre

"Journalists" now love to use a sequence of events and then present them like a causal narrative, ignoring the real reason the final event happened. I'm so freaking sick of it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ejstronge 2y ago
> Journalists" now love to use a sequence of events and then present them like a causal narrative, ignoring the real reason the final event happened. I'm so freaking sick of it. When was journalism, writing, or any sort of story-telling not done this way? Is the alternative a series of time stamped actions?
oefrha 2y ago
“Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after embezzling bank funds”, 5% clickthrough rate. “Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after falling for crypto scam”, 50% clickthrough rate. That’s why “journalists” use these scaremongering titles for nothing burgers. Also, lots of “journalists” these days hide behind “I didn’t write the title, my editor/whatever did”. Well, I see you on the byline and don’t see you resigning, so I’ll hold you responsible.
- grecy 2y ago
  As a journalist myself, I’m going to defend the article writers here. I’ve had heated discussions with editors about not changing my titles or words, and how I’d rather they didn’t run it and simply not pay me (I’m freelance) And then it prints with my name and a ton of changes I never saw. Words I have never used, implications added. Its frustrating but I don’t think there is much I can do
- yowzadave 2y ago
  I don't understand why you think the story is a "nothing burger". The crypto scam is part of what makes the story unique and interesting, and is certainly relevant. Your first headline would miss this completely. Would you be happier if it read, "Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after embezzling bank funds to pay for crypto scam"?
EasyMark 2y ago
It’s not new. Journo headlines have been clickbait since before there were clicks to bait.

"Journalists" now love to use a sequence of events and then present them like a causal narrative, ignoring the real reason the final event happened. I'm so freaking sick of it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ejstronge 2y ago

> Journalists" now love to use a sequence of events and then present them like a causal narrative, ignoring the real reason the final event happened. I'm so freaking sick of it. When was journalism, writing, or any sort of story-telling not done this way? Is the alternative a series of time stamped actions?

oefrha 2y ago

“Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after embezzling bank funds”, 5% clickthrough rate. “Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after falling for crypto scam”, 50% clickthrough rate. That’s why “journalists” use these scaremongering titles for nothing burgers. Also, lots of “journalists” these days hide behind “I didn’t write the title, my editor/whatever did”. Well, I see you on the byline and don’t see you resigning, so I’ll hold you responsible.

grecy 2y ago
As a journalist myself, I’m going to defend the article writers here. I’ve had heated discussions with editors about not changing my titles or words, and how I’d rather they didn’t run it and simply not pay me (I’m freelance) And then it prints with my name and a ton of changes I never saw. Words I have never used, implications added. Its frustrating but I don’t think there is much I can do
yowzadave 2y ago
I don't understand why you think the story is a "nothing burger". The crypto scam is part of what makes the story unique and interesting, and is certainly relevant. Your first headline would miss this completely. Would you be happier if it read, "Ex-bank CEO gets 24 years after embezzling bank funds to pay for crypto scam"?

EasyMark 2y ago

It’s not new. Journo headlines have been clickbait since before there were clicks to bait.