28 ms·

Endorsements come opinions editors, a special part of the paper where the paper prints opinions, not news. I agree that it would be nice if news outlets tried

Endorsements come opinions editors, a special part of the paper where the paper prints opinions, not news. I agree that it would be nice if news outlets tried to always be neutral, but a lot of TV news channels in the US would have almost nothing to say if you stopped their opinion reporting.

soerxpso 2y ago
If they have nothing to say, maybe nobody needs to hear it.
- willturman 2y ago
  Maybe? It’s almost a certainty that the news media outlets are outright bullshit and/or attention sucking propaganda. https://fs.blog/stop-reading-news/ https://fs.blog/stop-reading-news/
  - lancesells 2y ago
    https://www.washingtonpost.com https://www.washingtonpost.com I don't disagree with some of the things that blog post is saying, but excluding the opinions on the Washington Post home page, where is the is outright bullshit or propaganda? I hear the opinion often but I don't see it when I go to a newspaper. Now if you were to go to the home page of reddit or twitter there's clearly tons of propaganda.
    - willturman 2y ago
      1. Immediacy trumps quality. The current headline on the Washington post is talking about Israeli strikes in Iran. Is that the most immediate event pertaining to Israel? Probably. Is that the most important recent event pertaining to Israel? Well, that depends, doesn’t it?
dotnet00 2y ago
Opinion sections on websites and on TV/video should be segregated from the rest of the organization in some way. On paper having it as a section was fine because it used to be marked relatively clearly and there were serious logistical issues. However, with video and websites, it is very easy to mix editor opinion with news. People tuning into a news channel mid-report don't necessarily know they're listening to just an opinion, and same goes for people reading the headline from an embed or URL without clicking through to the page. Another thing I often notice is that opinion pieces get to play more loose with the facts. They can say completely unsubstantiated things or get actual facts wrong, but still say something as if it had the credibility of the organization. Yet if the backlash gets too strong they get to deflect by arguing that it was just an opinion and not meant to reflect on the organization. The current state of opinion pieces is like running a blog about my research and getting important things wrong there, then expecting people to assume that my actual research publications are accurate.

soerxpso 2y ago

If they have nothing to say, maybe nobody needs to hear it.

willturman 2y ago
Maybe? It’s almost a certainty that the news media outlets are outright bullshit and/or attention sucking propaganda. https://fs.blog/stop-reading-news/ https://fs.blog/stop-reading-news/
- lancesells 2y ago
  https://www.washingtonpost.com https://www.washingtonpost.com I don't disagree with some of the things that blog post is saying, but excluding the opinions on the Washington Post home page, where is the is outright bullshit or propaganda? I hear the opinion often but I don't see it when I go to a newspaper. Now if you were to go to the home page of reddit or twitter there's clearly tons of propaganda.
  - willturman 2y ago
    1. Immediacy trumps quality. The current headline on the Washington post is talking about Israeli strikes in Iran. Is that the most immediate event pertaining to Israel? Probably. Is that the most important recent event pertaining to Israel? Well, that depends, doesn’t it?

dotnet00 2y ago

Opinion sections on websites and on TV/video should be segregated from the rest of the organization in some way. On paper having it as a section was fine because it used to be marked relatively clearly and there were serious logistical issues. However, with video and websites, it is very easy to mix editor opinion with news. People tuning into a news channel mid-report don't necessarily know they're listening to just an opinion, and same goes for people reading the headline from an embed or URL without clicking through to the page. Another thing I often notice is that opinion pieces get to play more loose with the facts. They can say completely unsubstantiated things or get actual facts wrong, but still say something as if it had the credibility of the organization. Yet if the backlash gets too strong they get to deflect by arguing that it was just an opinion and not meant to reflect on the organization. The current state of opinion pieces is like running a blog about my research and getting important things wrong there, then expecting people to assume that my actual research publications are accurate.