[quote=eavesdropper]
Like others on this thread, I agree with many of the author’s points, and believe that others should think seriously about some of them. I just don’t see the need in presenting them under a headline meant to incite those who need no additional encouragement. And I see definite potential for great harm if writers, news reporters, bloggers, and pundits persist in doing so, no matter what their particular political persuasion (jeez!! I’m doing it again!!)
Content-wise, I appreciate your link to this article, faterik.[/quote]
Eaves: You mention having worked on a paper in the past, and I’d like to address that. I don’t know when in the past you worked in the newspaper biz, but I’d opine that the news business of the present is probably far different from that of the past, especially given the rapid encroachment of social media and the internet. The Drudge Report was certainly something of a game-changer during the CLinton Administration and I believe we’re seeing a return of the more sharp-elbowed and less objective days of the distant past.
So there will definitely be more “purple prose” and probably downright “yellow journalism”. The old adage of “if it bleeds, it leads” is now at the forefront, as the various media outlets in their various forms compete for eyeballs and readership/viewership. This has contributed to the polarization and is characterized by the writings of the sort linked above.
There was an interesting series of articles following the Breivik attacks in Norway, many of which asked if the present attitudes towards Islam contributed to, or even facilitated the attack.
I believe the days of truly objective and, more importantly, non-partisan journalship are behind us, and all of us, intentionally or not, now feed our confirmation bias by finding those sources that support and advance our “beliefs”.
Lastly, Arraya, as always, has come up with some excellent food for thought.
