in which Dave Schuler argues "There is no right to earn a living as an opinion writer": http://theglitteringeye.com/thats-not-necessary-to-liberal-democracy/
Interesting... the new conservative position went from an inaccurate "well, liberal reporters told coal workers to learn to code" (when in reality, reporters reported on coal miners that learned to code), and now the conservative position is "well, liberal reporters don't have a right to work for a liberal newspaper." And all this to justify complaints that conservatives were celebrating (liberal) reporters that lots their jobs (I put liberals in parenthesis since its not certain that all the laid off reporters were liberals).
Orange man bad alert On a side note, we've been lied to by politicians all our lives, so much so that a lot of us stopped caring what they say, since it's often so different to what they do, and ultimately only care about their policies and what those policies do. The media on the other hand, their only job is saying things, they don't actually do anything else, so if you're comparing their honesty to a politician, they really are earning their moniker.
"orange man alert"? Gee, I wonder why anyone would think the things the president of the United States says and does might have impact on many political discussions? And your point? That "other politicians" have lied in the past? That is your defense of supporting/defending trump, who lies continually, about all things big and small? Lies. Continually. I'm sorry, there is no defense. And also sorry, but taking this stance loses you the use of "but, but Obummer said I could keep my doctor" card. And of course, the "its the fake media" fault. Color me shocked. "Its not trump that is doing the lying continually, its the media that reports it... they're to blame." Perfect example... trump's intelligence people issued a report on current security risks that contradicts trump. So he brings them into the room for a photo op and says "I spoke with them and they said they all agree with him, they were misquoted, and "fake news". The report was made public. The intelligence people verbally gave the report findings on CSPAN. The transcripts were made public. And when reporters brought that up to trump, he changes the subject ("but we're here to discuss China"). And that's just one big lie from Friday. he started his presidency lying about the number of people that attended his inauguration. And its been one big lie after another ever since. trump lies. About everything and anything. Al the time.
epitaph for the Weekly Standard: I have to believe there is power in the deep liberal humanism implicit in the format of a classic American political magazine. You've got the news of the day, war and scandal, votes and vetoes. But the politics is literally bound together with essays about arts and culture. The message is unmistakable and easy to lose sight of in 2019: There is more to a good life than politics. A steady diet of horse races and roll calls, broken up only by weather reports or news of the weird, is like having a tube of Pringles for dinner and washing it down with a Coke Zero. Sure, it might be fun from time to time, but make it a daily habit and you'll eventually rot from the inside out. That's what cable news and clickbait sites have to offer. And it's not enough. Whether or not it succeeds every time, a political magazine aims to provide a balanced meal. In its best issues, it offers a moveable (type) feast, powered by a genuine belief in the power of words and ideas to improve things. The Weekly Standard was one such magazine. And the death of a magazine that gets to all the wrong answers the right way is a terrible loss. https://reason.com/archives/2019/02/02/the-weekly-standard-was-wrong
Funny, when I mentioned that journalists that were laid off weren't all Democrats I think folks scoffed. Here is one "liberal" that enjoyed The Weekly Standard, despite not agreeing with much of it, as it was well written, presented good arguments in an honorable way. Unfortunately, the "clickbait" sides are the ones that provide talking points and discussion board titles, even here.
you're right, I think I replied "lol." of course this is a separate media closing from the Buzzfeed one, but I think a lot of media outlets are in big trouble.
At one point early in my life I wanted to be a journalist (OK, a sports writer, but would have been happy writing the Scene section or even Obituaries to get my foot in the door). As trendy and partisan the "fake media" theme has gotten right now, I think we will all lose if the decline in print media continues and all we will be left with for "news" will be the james woods and his opposites (two brothers I see mentioned a lot on twitter).
Which industry employs more people, the coal industry or journalism? There is a lot of talk amongst politicians about helping coal miners and saving the coal industry. So I wonder which industry has a larger workforce.
Government workers don't like journalists historically because they are either telling the truth about something bad they did, or making up fake news about bad things they didn't do. They can't get help and shouldn't because then they would be beholden to the government anyway.
What a well-thought argument. You must have used your "Thesaurus for 8 Year-Olds" for that one. Anyway, it turns out some of these laid-off media workers were just straight up racists and even refer to themselves as "journalists".
Gotta wonder what all these laid off journalists think of that $5 million mastabatory super bowl commercial the Washington Post ran.
I thought the ad was well done and especially important in mentioning Houston native Austin Tice. I'm sure his family is grateful that his case, one of the more mysterious out there, got recognition during the game. You can definitely quibble with the use of money, though.
So here's something I don't get: I can understand your "dancing on the graves" of sites like BuzzFeed and Vice who employed editorial staff with hyper-partisan ideological bents like the shoehorned identity-based authorship goals (which you'd probably be surprised to find a few of us on the left agree with you about). But why the glee over local newspapers continuing to die and local journalists, who are paid to understand and report on the cities where we live, losing their jobs? I think the recent example of the Indianapolis Star is an important one. It was that team of local reporters who first reported on (note the difference between reporting vs. posting unsubstantiated rumors on a blog) Larry Nassar's sexual abuse of USA gymnasts. "The Star began its investigative reporting into Nassar and USA Gymnastics in 2016 and published its first related article in August 2016 when it shed light on USA Gymnastics' failure to properly investigate credible complaints of sexual abuse or pass the complaints on to police. After the August 2016 story, one of Nassar's victims, Rachael Denhollander, approached the Star about Nassar and USA Gymnastics' failure to investigate her complaint about him. This resulted in a September 2016 story on Nassar specifically. After the Nassar story, the Star was approached by a large number of Nassar's victims who shared similar stories of abuse. Nassar was charged with criminal sexual conduct in November 2016." That's important work that needed to be reported on and published. It took time to get the facts right, get sources to trust the reporters and tell the story accurately. Once it was published, Nassar was convicted and the people in power who didn't hold him accountable were forced to face the music. All of that is undeniably good, yet the paper's parent company is now laying off a ton of local reporters. Good thing some of those pesky journalists are unemployed now, right?
