• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Racinelli Gone

Grizzinator said:
There’s a lot of good journalists working in MT right now. Criticizing elements of their work is more than fair but these blanket assertions of bias aren’t particularly productive.
Click to expand...
There are probably sports journalists who report the scores and print quotes from players and coaches. Then, there are some who publish opinion pieces about fan bases being losers, but when it comes to coverups, GOD DAMNIT THEY DON’T EDITORIALIZE!!!
 
AZGrizFan said:
I’m married to a journalist. Who was a journalist for 20 years back when there were good journalists—back when journalists presented both sides of the argument and let the reader make up their own mind. There aren’t a “lot” of good journalists working anywhere anymore…90% of them have agendas and spew nothing but party propaganda (and that’s goes for both sides of the MSM).

Sooo…I’ll make all the blanket assertions I want.

Thanks though.
Click to expand...
It’s a journalist’s job to report truth, not both sides. Thanks to your wife for doing such an important job. Our society needs it and it’s often thankless and sometimes dangerous work.

Journalists are and should be accountable but throwing out hyperbole like 90% isn’t very persuasive.
 
Allezchat said:
Anyone that "corrects you" when you say journalists should present both sides and they say, "no the truth", shows they believe the truth to be their side. The opposite of balenced. It's what's wrong with the world today.
Click to expand...
No, reporting the truth is just a basic tenet of journalism. It doesn’t mean that what is true cannot be debated depending upon perspective. But it also doesn’t mean giving both sides equal weight and credibility when one is saying something false. So if someone is saying something false it should be included by the journalist but stated as such.
 
Grizzinator said:
No, reporting the truth is just a basic tenet of journalism. It doesn’t mean that what is true cannot be debated depending upon perspective. But it also doesn’t mean giving both sides equal weight and credibility when one is saying something false. So if someone is saying something false it should be included by the journalist but stated as such.
Click to expand...
Who gets to determine what is “false”?
 
AZGrizFan said:
Who gets to determine what is “false”?
Click to expand...
I don’t know why false would be in quotes. It’s a pretty straightforward definition.

I get there’re plenty of issues that have multiple viewpoints and and fleshing those out and including those opinions is an important part of journalism. But some things in this world are simply factual or not, and part of a journalist’s job is discerning and reporting as such.
 
Grizzinator said:
I don’t know why false would be in quotes. It’s a pretty straightforward definition.

I get there’re plenty of issues that have multiple viewpoints and and fleshing those out and including those opinions is an important part of journalism. But some things in this world are simply factual or not, and part of a journalist’s job is discerning and reporting as such.
Click to expand...
No, actually it’s not anymore. That’s the entire point. True and false is now a function of ideology and agenda for a large percentage of people.
 
AZGrizFan said:
No, actually it’s not anymore. That’s the entire point. True and false is now a function of ideology and agenda for a large percentage of people.
Click to expand...
No, if someone says 1+1=3, they’re lying. If someone says they were someplace when they weren’t or held a particular job when they didn’t, they’re lying. If someone states an incorrect number for an empirical data point, ideology doesn’t make it true. False statements don’t become any more true simply because people believe them.
 
Grizzinator said:
No, if someone says 1+1=3, they’re lying. If someone says they were someplace when they weren’t or held a particular job when they didn’t, they’re lying. If someone states an incorrect number for an empirical data point, ideology doesn’t make it true. False statements don’t become any more true simply because people believe them.
Click to expand...
Lol.

Well, that’s the way it USED to be, but not anymore. Ideology wins the day today, over true, right, and any other thing it wants to. And false statements, repeated often enough, often BECOME the perceived truth by many…hence the term “gaslighting”.

Anyway, enough of this. Have a happy new year Grizz..this Griz fan is down hard with the flu, so not how I imagined spending New Year’s Eve!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top