3 ms·
It wouldn't really be possible to list his symptoms exhaustively and in terms of the DSM, and have the article be readable by a general audience.
by rjurney 17y ago
It wouldn't really be possible to list his symptoms exhaustively and in terms of the DSM, and have the article be readable by a general audience.
- CWuestefeld 17y agoThe killer paradox of media. For anything to be interesting, it can't delve too deep. Anything in-depth can't be interesting. And thus the curse: any journalism must follow the pattern of telling anecdotes of one or maybe two representative cases. This lends a personal feel, but gets mired in the trap of "anecdote is not the singular for of data". Reporting that is engaging is rarely informative, at least to people that already have a working model of the topic.
- rjurney 17y agoI think you can do in-depth and be interesting. Its just quite hard. You're never going to please everyone, but you can inform a wide audience without being factually incorrect. This takes an enormous amount of work, though, and so its hard to pull off.