...of Tim Blair, "CBS knows all about deliberate manipulation intended to effect elections."
(In reference to this story from the Fake But Accurate Factory.)
You know, one of the things that has made blogging so tiresome in the past few years is the hardheadedness of the old-line media types. This is a perfectly legitimate story--the idea that people might think that HallibushitlerRoveCo have a magic X-Box console where they play with oil prices is out there. It is espoused out of ignorance, and occasionally malice. In the latter case, it's best ignored, but in the former case it is the result of a pitiable lack of understanding of even the most basic ideas of economics. And logic. Why not frame the story in such a way that addresses these myths and dispels them, rather than further clouding the matter with tactics such as using unscientific polling results, along with a barely concealed politically-driven agenda? I keep hearing lofty words from the press type folks who say they only have the Truth at heart; well, why not put that into practice and attempt--at least every once in a while--to actually give readers something worthwhile?
Either that, or start giving the Flat Earth people some more time to talk.
In the end, it comes down to the fact you've got the ignorant interviewing the ignorant.
My suggestion?
I think it's high time that this country devotes its abundance of resources to developing schools where people can go who want to become journalists. And not just any schools, but maybe even something on a college level, where they'll have to take other classes with other students in subjects such as mathematics and history and ethics and economics and language and science!
We could call them "journalism schools."
Nice ring to it, eh?
And just think of the promise offered by such an education if newspapers and electronic media organizations would actually start hiring people like this--people who know the difference between "deficit" and "debt," people who know what a "fallacy" is. I know, it boggles the mind to think of such things, but I promise you, it's not nearly as crazy as half the conspiracy theories you read about.
Posted by Terry Oglesby at October 18, 2006 10:30 AMI'm not sure but I think most J schools don't require more than a basic Stats and a intro to Econ. Um, after reading the WaPo and NYT I'm not too sure on that. I do know I've seen better reporting involving basic chem in the food section of the NYT than above the fold on Iraq WND's.
Posted by: Tony von Krag at October 18, 2006 12:42 PMWhat!? You mean there already ARE "jouralism" schools!?
Hmm.
I'd see about getting my money back, then.
Posted by: Terry Oglesby at October 18, 2006 12:44 PMWay back in the stone(d) age (early 1970s), it appeared to me that Journalism was what you failed into if you couldn't write well enought to be an English major and weren't smart enough to be a History major (and had more sense than to be a Theater major).
Posted by: steevil (Dr Weevil's bro Steve) at October 18, 2006 12:52 PMSteevil, English majors are not necessarily good writers, just prolix.
Posted by: Janis Gore at October 18, 2006 01:13 PMNow there's someone we can ask! Miss Janis--just what is the deal with journalism today? Is it just me being snippy, or am I just more attuned to the lack of care about simple things, is it a product of the decline of college education's rigor in general, or what?
And I know I'm tarring with a big brush, because there are some great journalist/writers out there doing very good work (just like there are honest used car salesmen, and politicians, and lawyers), but I still don't recall it being quite so bad in the past (say, from around 1940-1970) as it is now. Then again, maybe I didn't know any better.
But it seems like we've got folks who're no better than the worst of the yellow press days.
Posted by: Terry Oglesby at October 18, 2006 01:22 PMDon't ask me. I finished off my education with a journalism degree because I thought I'd pursue technical writing as a career.
I do think that a lot of people go into journalism now with the notion of changing the world rather than reporting how it is.
Geraldo Rivera spoke to my class at SMU. He has a law degree, but told us he thought he'd be a more effective force for change in journalism.
Posted by: Janis Gore at October 18, 2006 01:29 PMWell, I'll grant him he was a force for change, although I can't quite say it was positive for the business itself. He did okay for himself, though, and I suppose that's what it's all about.
I suppose the biggest shift came when people stopped wanting to be like Ernie Pyle and wanted to be Woodward and Bernstein.
Posted by: Terry Oglesby at October 18, 2006 01:49 PMHere, journalism courses were hijacked about thirty years ago by Left-wing hacks who taught paranoid theories about Big Capitalist Media and loopy post-modern communication theories.
Result: much of today's papers makes great fish and chip wrapping. I love the smell of hot fish and chips in fresh newsprint. With vinegar!
I think the year was 1988 when Mr. Rivera spoke.
I asked him what he, as a journalist, knew on the inside in that year.
He told me ABC this and CBS that, and less than two years later we were Gulf War.
Posted by: Janis Gore at October 18, 2006 11:15 PMKitchenhand, are you saying that you guys have had these journalist schools, too!? Man, and here I thought I had an original idea...
As for fish and chips--our paper here has messed THAT up, too. Several years ago they went to a new printing process with a different kind of ink, and it smudges easily and gets everywhere, and I don't think I'd want to eat anything that came out of it. Even with vinegar.
And Miss Janis, I think there are still very few media organizations who see the world in any other way than seeing themselves at the center of it all.
Posted by: Terry Oglesby at October 19, 2006 08:49 AMTo Mr. Rivera's credit, he seems to have matured in the past few years.
Posted by: Janis Gore at October 19, 2006 12:29 PM