4 ms·

What is the point of being a Journalist (except for easy money and not having to do anything other than copy + paste) if you are only allowed to "write", word f

What is the point of being a Journalist (except for easy money and not having to do anything other than copy + paste) if you are only allowed to "write", word for word, the article they give you to publish?

parineum 1y ago
They're still allowed to write whatever they want, they just won't be invited to Christmas parties anymore.
- croes 1y ago
  You mean they are cut of from an important source of information so the adminstration can always claim hearsay
vintermann 1y ago
If you identify sufficiently with the people giving you the article to publish, it's not a "they" but an "us". Even if the decisions are taken in rooms you don't have access to. Maybe they think they'll get access to them eventually if they're loyal. It might seem cowardly, but it isn't that different to what happens every day in business. Society is full of organisations working on the "make the boss' opinions your own" principle.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > If you identify sufficiently with the people giving you the article to publish Then you aren’t a journalist.
  - vintermann 1y ago
    Not a good journalist maybe, but if you identify too little with them, you probably don't even get to "sit where you're sitting", as Chomsky said.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > if you identify too little with them, you probably don't even get to "sit where you're sitting", as Chomsky said The people winning White House credentials are political influencers. Chomsky was an interesting linguist. His political observations are about as scientific as our current crop of Silicon Valley elites’.
      - mikkupikku 1y ago
        Chomsky's observations about how the media works may not have been solid science, but from the way you describe the present circumstance it really sounds like Chomsky is still on target.
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > from the way you describe the present circumstance it really sounds like Chomsky is still on target The refutation is there are lots of places to sit. Like, yes, the people at a linguistics conference will predominantly be linguists. That doesn’t suggest a linguistics conspiracy.
        vintermann 1y ago
        So you don't have any problem with the Hegseth Pentagon demands then? There are still many places to sit, and who gets access is mostly decided by neutral competence anyway? (That's what your linguistics conference analogy suggests). Chomsky's whole point is that it doesn't take a conspiracy for journalists to share their superiors' views. Not for those superiors to be very aligned with each other.
        mikkupikku 1y ago
        > "That doesn’t suggest a linguistics conspiracy." That's Chomsky's point. In Manufacturing Consent, Chomsky explains how the appearance of collusion can arise without conspiracy. Like-minded people hiring and promoting like-minded people isn't a conspiracy, it only looks like one because people with similar incentives and values will behave in similar ways given similar circumstances.
  - eagleal 1y ago
    You're never heard of biased or militant journalists have you? In fact the most common form of journalism you will find is what's akin to a Propaganda channel of a Sponsoring Party (Defense, Media Company, Political party, Rich Individual with an agenda, etc). Essentialy a PR employee. But this is true since always. The kind of journalism we usually think of though is Investigative journalism, but that's a different beast and usually doesn't really pay.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > You're never heard of biased or militant journalists have you? You seem to have presumed your conclusion.
notarobot123 1y ago
What is the point of being a Developer (except for easy money and not having to do anything other than copy + paste) if you are only allowed to "code", word for word, the feature specifications ("user stories") they give you to build?

parineum 1y ago

They're still allowed to write whatever they want, they just won't be invited to Christmas parties anymore.

croes 1y ago
You mean they are cut of from an important source of information so the adminstration can always claim hearsay

vintermann 1y ago

If you identify sufficiently with the people giving you the article to publish, it's not a "they" but an "us". Even if the decisions are taken in rooms you don't have access to. Maybe they think they'll get access to them eventually if they're loyal. It might seem cowardly, but it isn't that different to what happens every day in business. Society is full of organisations working on the "make the boss' opinions your own" principle.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> If you identify sufficiently with the people giving you the article to publish Then you aren’t a journalist.
- vintermann 1y ago
  Not a good journalist maybe, but if you identify too little with them, you probably don't even get to "sit where you're sitting", as Chomsky said.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > if you identify too little with them, you probably don't even get to "sit where you're sitting", as Chomsky said The people winning White House credentials are political influencers. Chomsky was an interesting linguist. His political observations are about as scientific as our current crop of Silicon Valley elites’.
    - mikkupikku 1y ago
      Chomsky's observations about how the media works may not have been solid science, but from the way you describe the present circumstance it really sounds like Chomsky is still on target.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > from the way you describe the present circumstance it really sounds like Chomsky is still on target The refutation is there are lots of places to sit. Like, yes, the people at a linguistics conference will predominantly be linguists. That doesn’t suggest a linguistics conspiracy.
        vintermann 1y ago
        So you don't have any problem with the Hegseth Pentagon demands then? There are still many places to sit, and who gets access is mostly decided by neutral competence anyway? (That's what your linguistics conference analogy suggests). Chomsky's whole point is that it doesn't take a conspiracy for journalists to share their superiors' views. Not for those superiors to be very aligned with each other.
        mikkupikku 1y ago
        > "That doesn’t suggest a linguistics conspiracy." That's Chomsky's point. In Manufacturing Consent, Chomsky explains how the appearance of collusion can arise without conspiracy. Like-minded people hiring and promoting like-minded people isn't a conspiracy, it only looks like one because people with similar incentives and values will behave in similar ways given similar circumstances.
- eagleal 1y ago
  You're never heard of biased or militant journalists have you? In fact the most common form of journalism you will find is what's akin to a Propaganda channel of a Sponsoring Party (Defense, Media Company, Political party, Rich Individual with an agenda, etc). Essentialy a PR employee. But this is true since always. The kind of journalism we usually think of though is Investigative journalism, but that's a different beast and usually doesn't really pay.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > You're never heard of biased or militant journalists have you? You seem to have presumed your conclusion.

notarobot123 1y ago

What is the point of being a Developer (except for easy money and not having to do anything other than copy + paste) if you are only allowed to "code", word for word, the feature specifications ("user stories") they give you to build?