Journalism and reporting takes facts, and it takes work, and it takes editors willing to tell reporters, “No, you don’t quite have the story yet.”
-
-
Show this thread
-
Yes, the so-called “mainstream media” screws thugs up often — is too safe, is too access-driven, etc. — and that’s why alt-press and bloggers and citizen activists are essential as well.
Show this thread -
Journalists — at least good ones — are totally comfortable with — in fact eager to be held accountable from all sides: from editors, from readers, from the left, right, and every direction.
Show this thread -
The differences between the types of people adding to the conversation are important, though, and I don’t think we want to ignore those distinctions.
Show this thread -
When I was at Law Dork, I had little influence over the conversation, but I also had little accountability — which let me explore the outer reaches of things a little more carelessly. Sometimes, it led to a gem, which was great!
Show this thread -
The things I would write there were often bad — and were certainly not edited by anyone. I had no one, besides commenters, telling me, “Why are you writing this? It has no logical coherence?” or “This adds nothing to the conversation.”
Show this thread -
But, it taught me a lot, and I learned about process, and I learned how to follow a story — like the beginnings of marriage equality, SCOTUS rulings, the hate crimes bill, the federal Prop 8 lawsuit.
Show this thread -
Then, when I did get an editor at Metro Weekly, I was at a local, niche publication — but I was in DC and covering an issue of growing national importance: LGBT rights. So, I saw my influence on the conversation grow, along with accountability.
Show this thread -
When I was able to ask a question at the White House press briefing, for example, it often was as much about getting the folks in the front two rows to think about the issue — bc I knew they could actually push for an answer from the White House.
Show this thread -
Then, I went to BuzzFeed and had more of a voice, and, as BuzzFeed has grown and as I’ve continued my work, my input in the conversation has grown — but, even looking at the replies here, my accountability has grown as well.
Show this thread -
Recently, I tweeted out a story that some folks thought our framing of it was bad. I responded to people for like 6 hours. And, you know what, many were still not satisfied,but I followed 3 of them, bc I wanted to make sure I was getting their insights going forward.
Show this thread -
Moments like that are how I like to make sure I keep holding myself accountable.
Show this thread -
And, as usual, pup is right that some journalists — higher up the scale or not from me (and, on bad days, I’m sure me as well) — take fair criticism poorly. That’s wrong, and we all should work on that.https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/934298892941664256 …
Show this thread -
Anyone looking for the truth and seeking to add their voice to the conversation should do so. Of course, and I love it — I am a prime beneficiary of this new world.
Show this thread -
But, as readers, I suggest people think about whether those tweeting claims or conclusions that happen to agree with what you want to hear have engaged in independent journalism to reach this conclusion — and whether they are accountable to anyone for what they write.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If this is a slam against Seth Abramson, I’d like to hear a counter argument. But I don’t understand your ‘bad for democracy’ comment with so many things that are truly bad for democracy right now.
-
If this is about Seth, I don’t understand the criticism. He gathers journalism from all over and weaves together a big picture. He doesn’t claim to be doing more than putting pieces together. It’s a big project, and I’m glad to have someone doing it.
-
Seth Abramson is a conspiracy theorist.
-
Conspiracy theorist as in Pizza Gate, Flat Earth or Illuminati? Or conspiracy theorist in that he has pieced together evidence that creates a larger picture? Not trolling. I’d like to understand where this criticism comes from & you seem credible.
-
Conspiracy theorist as in: he comes to unsubstantiated conclusions. The “bigger picture” he weaves wouldn’t hold up in court and he knows it. But it works for Twitter.
-
I meant to say... you CAN'T ask for much more from someone- lays out facts, shows his work, presents his conclusions.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.