Undercover Black Man said ...
The business problems facing corporate journalism have fuck-all to do with the "guild-like" institutionalization of journalistic best practices... i.e., sourcing, accuracy, fairness, thoroughness.The New York Times and Washington Post -- though with flaws concomitant with any human endeavor -- continue to emblemize such best practices. Practices which could only be developed and maintained through a "guild-like institutionalization." That is, a position of earned authority to enforce the definition of "good journalism" and "bad journalism" for the society at large.
Who-da-hell you figure should define what is "good medicine" and "bad medicine," Craig? Or "good scholarship" and "bad scholarship"? Except those who hold to a standard of professional excellence evolved over generations.
The Washington Post yesterday published a major 3,000 word front-page story examining how the paper downplayed critics of the Iraq war before the U.S. attacked lat year.
Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks revealed how in October 2002 editors killed a piece of his titled “Doubts” that outlined how many senior Pentagon officials were reluctant about plans to attack Iraq. Ricks also added “The paper was not front-paging stuff. Administration assertions were on the front page. Things that challenged the administration were on A18 on Sunday or A24 on Monday. There was an attitude among editors: Look, we’re going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?”
7 comments:
Am I saying believe everything you read in the New York Times and the Washington Post? Heeeellll naw. They are the product of human beings, and as such will never be perfect.
But should one grant more credence to those papers than to Executive Intelligence Review? WorldNetDaily? The Final Call? The Daily Worker? PrisonPlanet.com? DavidDuke.com?
Of course.
Because the NYT and the Post represent -- and have represented for decades -- the "guild-like institutionalization" of standards of professional conduct... and quality of reportage... and literary value.
And those other "sources of memes" HAVE NOT.
These are simple facts.
What about the Washington Times, David?
dayyum!
now that's some straight-up, fact-based type moonfood right thurr......,
What about the Washington Times, David?
Somewhere in between, Mike.
That paper probably won't exist at the end of the year, by the way.
Remember who told you first.
Mike, why do you ask about the Washington Times?
I'll take PrisonPlanet.com or even DavidDuke.com over the Jew York Times and the Brainwashington Times any day.
I don't give any organization points for only admitting its mistakes after the fact.
War protesters said the papers were downplaying their problems with Iraq war. Anti-war groups made the same claims. Most American newspapers said they were being fair and balanced when it came to their reporting, and laughed at their critics.
It was only after the fact, when their mistakes had been completely exposed, that the issued mea culpas. Reminds me of how cable news stations ignore all standards of journalism to saturate the market with certain stories, then come back two days later to apologize for what they did.
How sorry can somebody be if they keep doing something? If a chick keeps trusting a dude who beats her when he gets mad, she has to bear some of the blame, no?
Post a Comment