Remember when government officials discussing sensitive information over unsecured channels was treated as a national crisis worthy of endless investigations? Apparently, those days are over. While…
Let’s be clear: uncritically reporting the White House’s “nothing to see here” stance isn’t journalism — it’s stenography.
Yes, it is journalism. Access journalism specifically, which is still very useful, especially under a hostile government. It can serve as a launch point for investigative journalism (what Masnick is actually calling for here), without drawing fire from those in power.
Like it or not journalists don’t have to prescribe anything specific to fill a role. Sometimes it is enough to let the ruling class feel heard, because no matter how opaque the rhetoric, even deceptive signals carry the truth.
access journalism? where you get some jerk in a chair and lob softballs to retain “access” to them? that thing? thats whats valuable? maintaining access to the people who you know for a fact are lying to you so that you can lob softballs is the valuable thing.
access journalism a bastard child: spawn of the unholy union of the media’s profit motive and the accessed’s desire to legitimize their message (you are invited to recall the message being legitimized in this case).
the government has means of sending its own messages. uncritical ‘stenographizing’ of those messages is indistinguishable from endorsement of them. if the media is being pressed into serving as propaganda outlets for the state, that should be the story, not “the white house said…” and clearly they still have some power to say these things remaining because here is tech dirt saying it.
telling someone the weather is dry when its actually wet because you want to deceive them into not carrying an umbrella has negative truth value.
a journalist doesnt prescribe, they describe. they describe the truth (which often includes reporting who is lying about what) as best they can. thats what makes them a journalist instead of an opinion-columnist. they document, record, critically analyze, and publicly journal their findings.
the only thing carrying disinformation-water for a tyrant serves as a “launching point” for is a career in propaganda.
I’m not saying you should believe everything the media or government says, just that the specific lies they choose to tell holds valuable information about their motives, sponsors, allies, etc…
You are asking to be spoon fed the truth. I’m saying that if you learn to refine the truth, propaganda begins to have the opposite of its intended effect.
I’m sorry, I’m reading back over that message and it came off at least twice as harsh as was intended. My fury should be directed towards others and it accidentally spilled onto you. I came at you a little sideways and I regret the tone.
There is, of course, value in hearing the lies from the horse’s mouth
Yes, it is journalism. Access journalism specifically, which is still very useful, especially under a hostile government. It can serve as a launch point for investigative journalism (what Masnick is actually calling for here), without drawing fire from those in power.
Like it or not journalists don’t have to prescribe anything specific to fill a role. Sometimes it is enough to let the ruling class feel heard, because no matter how opaque the rhetoric, even deceptive signals carry the truth.
access journalism? where you get some jerk in a chair and lob softballs to retain “access” to them? that thing? thats whats valuable? maintaining access to the people who you know for a fact are lying to you so that you can lob softballs is the valuable thing.
access journalism a bastard child: spawn of the unholy union of the media’s profit motive and the accessed’s desire to legitimize their message (you are invited to recall the message being legitimized in this case).
the government has means of sending its own messages. uncritical ‘stenographizing’ of those messages is indistinguishable from endorsement of them. if the media is being pressed into serving as propaganda outlets for the state, that should be the story, not “the white house said…” and clearly they still have some power to say these things remaining because here is tech dirt saying it.
telling someone the weather is dry when its actually wet because you want to deceive them into not carrying an umbrella has negative truth value.
a journalist doesnt prescribe, they describe. they describe the truth (which often includes reporting who is lying about what) as best they can. thats what makes them a journalist instead of an opinion-columnist. they document, record, critically analyze, and publicly journal their findings.
the only thing carrying disinformation-water for a tyrant serves as a “launching point” for is a career in propaganda.
I’m not saying you should believe everything the media or government says, just that the specific lies they choose to tell holds valuable information about their motives, sponsors, allies, etc…
You are asking to be spoon fed the truth. I’m saying that if you learn to refine the truth, propaganda begins to have the opposite of its intended effect.
I’m sorry, I’m reading back over that message and it came off at least twice as harsh as was intended. My fury should be directed towards others and it accidentally spilled onto you. I came at you a little sideways and I regret the tone.
There is, of course, value in hearing the lies from the horse’s mouth