The main difference: I don't think a typical journalist finds it rewarding to have his or work panned, even if it results in a spike on the analytics dash that would be nice if it weren't the result of viral loathing
-
-
Show this thread
-
As motivations go, influencing the narrative may seem better than driving up pageviews, but it still means constantly needing to either discover or manufacture novel stories. And one of those is a lot easier to do than the other
Show this thread -
It's quite often the case that when a reporter gets a story "wrong," there never was any way to get it right; getting the story right would turn it into a non-story
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Bernard Goldberg did that in 'Bias' twenty years ago.https://www.amazon.com/Bias-Insider-Exposes-Media-Distort/dp/0895261901 …
- 2 more replies
-
-
-
My deepest take on this is that journalists are always after a Story. That story might not always line up with reality.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
MSM has turned into sensationalist material written by gig workers for maximum click/view revenue. Some of it with motivation to drive elections whichever way their money lords want it to go in. I doubt most journalists are real anymore and just pretty faces to put on gig papers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Searched for these tweets today cuz they're an interesting/great take on journalism I've never heard b4pic.twitter.com/qeXPJaSOjI
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If what they coated about was running a profitable business they wouldn’t be journos
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.