Why bloggers are useful

- December 28th, 2012

Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

1 comment

  1. Shane says:

    First: you’re a fool if you only read what you agree with. Second: you’re a fool if you only read one source. Third: you’re a fool if you only read what was written two blocks away.

    In reference to the lower standards of “journalism” today, I often refer to reportage as “pardon me while I suspend my ethics for a moment.” In today’s new “reportage”, the Op Ed is -for some- news. Op Eds are not desinged to be news. The point of them is to sell newspapers and more importantly, to sell advertising. Today, if we actually had any investigative journalism, people that publish stories full of facts would be out of a job. Facts aren’t fun to read. Screaming is fun to read.

    As I said before: “pardon me while I suspend my ethics for a moment.”

    I look at today’s journalism as a choice between pancakes and donuts. Both of them are sweet, they take very little time to digest, and we don’t have to work hard to consume or manufacture them. It is for this reason, that I differentiate between entertainment and news.

    One does not need a Master of Communications degree to understand when figures of speech such as the liberal media (or right wing media) are used, the reality is: it’s a marketing tool used to solidify readership, and by extension, keep the person who said it, in a job.

    I opened my letter by stating that “you’re a fool if you only read one source.” Well, guess what? You are. You are even MORE of a fool if you only read the right or left-wing media. You should be reading both, AND, you should also find out who owns the media source (via the Colombia Journalism Review et. al), where the writer studied, what affiliations ‘they’ have and in doing so, whether they can actually be trusted to be a “journalist”. But, of course, that takes five donuts to consume.

    Finally, if you only view North American sources (upon international issues), then you really are a fool. So, if you already know that, and, if you only read Haaretz, then you can be certain that you will only hear their side of the story. On the other hand, one might find it to be interesting to go as far in one direction (the source you agree with) to another, like Press TV (for example). Or, one can directly compare the same story as reported by the BBC and Aljazeera, against CNN or Fox.

    The moral of the story is: do not look to the media to educate you. That’s not their job. Their job is to sell donuts. If you choose -only- to eat donuts, then do not become insulted when someone is critical of the lack of depth in what you perceive to be your understanding.

Comments are closed.