MarvinTheParanoidAndroid
This will all end in tears, I just know it.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2015
Ever since Trump won the election in 2016, journalistic standards have cratered, or perhaps they merely disposed of the pretense for the journalistic integrity they claim to have.
Ardent defenders of journalism will claim that journalists are held to rigorous standards while others will say they're essentially monkeys on a typewriter holding out on eventually producing Shakespeare through sheer typing attrition.
Many people have arrived at the conclusion that journalism is the vocation of activists and not of reporters, no longer are journalists interested in telling you what happened but in using their platform to disseminate propaganda that furthers their political leanings.
Some believe that this degradation in journalism is not the result of politics in and of itself but of the jump from print newspaper to the internet where rage clicks matter most, so the most inflammatory headlines get the most success by ad click standards, and that this is where the true source of the rot in journalistic integrity begins.
Allegations of mass lying in news media goes as far back as at least the 90s, as described in the book "News and the Culture of Lying: How Journalism Really Works" by Paul H. Weaver, former political scientist at Harvard university, journalist for fortune magazine and corporate communications exec for the Ford motor company.
Others speculate it goes much further back to the days of Walter Cronkite, citing that many of his predictions were wrong and his reporting was filtered through his personal politics.
The common trends that erode trust in journalism include things like games of telephone where the original information is passed along and mutates until it is unrecognizable from the truth at all, or simply lying by omission so as to not include unfavorable details which would change the tailored version of events the journo wants you to believe. Other instances include mere failure to investigate a lead and just passing it off as the truth, like this hilarious gem.
Although I know already the general attitude A&H and the rest of the site have toward journalism, that they're basically all lying scum of the earth, I'm still curious how people generally feel about journalism in the moment and if they see any redeeming value in the profession. I'm also very curious as to the exact range of trust to distrust the profession holds for fellow Kiwis in general.
I leave you now with this lovely chorus of soulless meatsacks from all different corners of televised news media repeating the same script in unison like that of a Christmas carol.
Ardent defenders of journalism will claim that journalists are held to rigorous standards while others will say they're essentially monkeys on a typewriter holding out on eventually producing Shakespeare through sheer typing attrition.
Many people have arrived at the conclusion that journalism is the vocation of activists and not of reporters, no longer are journalists interested in telling you what happened but in using their platform to disseminate propaganda that furthers their political leanings.
Some believe that this degradation in journalism is not the result of politics in and of itself but of the jump from print newspaper to the internet where rage clicks matter most, so the most inflammatory headlines get the most success by ad click standards, and that this is where the true source of the rot in journalistic integrity begins.
Allegations of mass lying in news media goes as far back as at least the 90s, as described in the book "News and the Culture of Lying: How Journalism Really Works" by Paul H. Weaver, former political scientist at Harvard university, journalist for fortune magazine and corporate communications exec for the Ford motor company.
Others speculate it goes much further back to the days of Walter Cronkite, citing that many of his predictions were wrong and his reporting was filtered through his personal politics.
The common trends that erode trust in journalism include things like games of telephone where the original information is passed along and mutates until it is unrecognizable from the truth at all, or simply lying by omission so as to not include unfavorable details which would change the tailored version of events the journo wants you to believe. Other instances include mere failure to investigate a lead and just passing it off as the truth, like this hilarious gem.
Although I know already the general attitude A&H and the rest of the site have toward journalism, that they're basically all lying scum of the earth, I'm still curious how people generally feel about journalism in the moment and if they see any redeeming value in the profession. I'm also very curious as to the exact range of trust to distrust the profession holds for fellow Kiwis in general.
I leave you now with this lovely chorus of soulless meatsacks from all different corners of televised news media repeating the same script in unison like that of a Christmas carol.
