just a point
Sep. 18th, 2006 01:33 amI'm too tired to go into the whole of this now, and it will probably be misconstrued but:
Journalists don't owe you shit.
(and to digress for a moment -- don't talk to a journalist unless you are extremely disciplined about what you say and how you say it and can say it concisely, otherwise you're not going to be happy with the result. and if you don't know who else they're interviewing for a piece, or the thrust of it, don't talk to the journalist if you don't have the badnwidth for a displeasing result. I mean really, are you going to go on reality TV and then be surprised that the editing makes it look different than it was?).
They are not obligated to report the truth as you see it, nor are they obligated to care about what they write about. Hell, I had whole classes in J-school on how to write about shit I didn't actually understand (read: how to be a science journalist without being a scientist).
Some journalists are sloppy. Some are scumbags. Some like human interest stories because they care and some like them because they like to mock the freaks. Journalists can't control their editors or their headlines are are frequently beyond frustrated by whatever version of their article finally makes it to print.
Regardless, their job is not to make the subjects of their articles happy.
Finally, journalists are human and make mistakes.
Plenty of people I know have plenty of reasons to be legitimately pissed at journalists, but I am once again fed up with people being angry with "The Media" and taking it out on some non-specific guy at the bottom on the food chain who didn't do shit and/or some poor journalist who did the best they could with 600 words when you wanted 6,000 for your pet obsession.
Jouranlism is a screwy business, populated by screwy people dealing with the awkward and ugly trasntion into industry. Like anything else it has its good guys and bad guys. But I am sick sick sick of the immediate/automatic response to an article that didn't meet someone's personal fantasy being "is she stupid?" (this, btw, not directed at the individual on my friendslist who has a very good reason to be saying that very thing over a certain recent event).
I can be a real prick, but hello, NOT THE BAD GUY.
(brought to you by asshatery I'm trying to have the dignity not to explain)
Journalists don't owe you shit.
(and to digress for a moment -- don't talk to a journalist unless you are extremely disciplined about what you say and how you say it and can say it concisely, otherwise you're not going to be happy with the result. and if you don't know who else they're interviewing for a piece, or the thrust of it, don't talk to the journalist if you don't have the badnwidth for a displeasing result. I mean really, are you going to go on reality TV and then be surprised that the editing makes it look different than it was?).
They are not obligated to report the truth as you see it, nor are they obligated to care about what they write about. Hell, I had whole classes in J-school on how to write about shit I didn't actually understand (read: how to be a science journalist without being a scientist).
Some journalists are sloppy. Some are scumbags. Some like human interest stories because they care and some like them because they like to mock the freaks. Journalists can't control their editors or their headlines are are frequently beyond frustrated by whatever version of their article finally makes it to print.
Regardless, their job is not to make the subjects of their articles happy.
Finally, journalists are human and make mistakes.
Plenty of people I know have plenty of reasons to be legitimately pissed at journalists, but I am once again fed up with people being angry with "The Media" and taking it out on some non-specific guy at the bottom on the food chain who didn't do shit and/or some poor journalist who did the best they could with 600 words when you wanted 6,000 for your pet obsession.
Jouranlism is a screwy business, populated by screwy people dealing with the awkward and ugly trasntion into industry. Like anything else it has its good guys and bad guys. But I am sick sick sick of the immediate/automatic response to an article that didn't meet someone's personal fantasy being "is she stupid?" (this, btw, not directed at the individual on my friendslist who has a very good reason to be saying that very thing over a certain recent event).
I can be a real prick, but hello, NOT THE BAD GUY.
(brought to you by asshatery I'm trying to have the dignity not to explain)