Serious question. How do these clownvoy yahoos have endless money and free time to sit in their cars doing jackshit for weeks at a time? https://pressprogress.ca/far-right-save-the-children-convoy-gathering-at-rural-base-camp-outside-ottawa/ #ottawa
🇳🇱
@kdorse I went there to try to learn about that.. but my god the obvious bias and lack of journalistic integrity I couldnt even get past the first few lines...
Who starts a "press" agency announcing their bias right int he name of the agency... Thats not news.
That said, I am sure whatever the fuck the GOP or alt-right is doing here is probably some pathetic nonsense... but i just cant read something written with no journalistic integrity, I want to form my own opinions, even if i might agree with yours when I do (and probably would if its GOP bs)
As i said i didnt read the article. There was so much bias in the first line i couldnt stomach it.
> You have a lot to say about an article you didn’t read.
No, I dont.. in fact I made quite clear I have nothing to say about the content of the article, particularly cause I couldnt get past the cringe to read it.. thats ALL I said... thats not a "lot" thats very little....
> PressProgress leans left, but they are reliable journalists
That is a contradiction.. you cant have a political lean in your journalism and still be a reliable journalist... that is contrary to journalistic integrity by its very nature. That said, it is the norm in journalism these days and with few exceptions there is very little journalism that lives up to the standards of that name.
> And there’s no bias in the first line of the article - just a straight reporting of facts, ugly as they are.
Sounds exactly like what someone would say who has bias and wants their bias confirmed... It was an expression of opinion... Not a presentation of facts.. facts would be the events themselves, who said what, what actions were taken, without an a preferred interpretation sold along with that. That is not at all what the tone of the first few lines convey.
@freemo @kdorse Again, you didn’t read the article and you are now making incorrect statements about it. You’re also making some pretty misguided assumptions about me. Ironic.
Go read the entire article. And click on the link titled “Save the Children Convoy.” Read that one, too. They bring the receipts.
I don’t agree with your assertion that an ideological leaning negates reliability in journalism. It is possible, of course - there are lots of unreliable outlets on the right and the left. But I don’t see that bias in this article, aside from the fact that they are revealing a very ugly reality about this group of people.
Read the article - Then, tell me what you would change. I’m not looking for an essay, just a sentence or two reporting the facts as you think a non-biased, responsible journalist would. I’m really interested in how you will frame the pedophilia accusations the group is making.
(Stepping away from the computer for a bit 👋)
> Again, you didn’t read the article and you are now making incorrect statements about it. You’re also making some pretty misguided assumptions about me. Ironic.
I have made no assertions about the content of the article. I made assertions about the agency, the headline and first line... the rest of the article I made **no** claims about... so why would i have to read the whole article when im not commenting on the rest of the article?
> Go read the entire article. And click on the link titled “Save the Children Convoy.” Read that one, too. They bring the receipts.
Bringing receipts to justify your opinion or bias doesnt change the fact that you express opinion or bias. So that wouldnt change the fact that it lacks journalistic integrity.
If a journalist says "Bob murdered bill, and bob is a horrible person".. while "bob is a horrible person" is an opinion I agree with, and "bob murdered bill" may be a statement of fact with proof shown... none of that changes the fact taht the conclusion of "bob is a horrible person" is an expression of opinion (drawn from facts, but still an opinion). Thus has no place in journalism... Doubly so if your website is "News on murderers so we can bring awareness to how shitty murderers are"... like yea I agree with the cause, but thats nor journalism, thats activism.
> I don’t agree with your assertion that an ideological leaning negates reliability in journalism.
Simply having an ideological leaning doesnt.. but when your news agency promises to encode that ideological leaning in their reporting (not even accidental, but intentionally incorporates it) then yes, 100% lacks journalistic integrity.
> Read the article - Then, tell me what you would change. I’m not looking for an essay, just a sentence or two reporting the facts as you think a non-biased, responsible journalist would. I’m really interested in how you will frame the pedophilia accusations the group is making.
I can already tell you what I'd change as there are enough issues in the first lines and headline... Issues that can not be corrected with "receipts" because they are opinions about the facts, not the facts themselves.
Here are the corrections I'd make:
PressProgress -> PressNeutrality
far-right -> anti-LGBT
"Pedophile Conspiracy convoy" -> This needs to be completely reworked on a few accounts.. 1) the meaning is ambiguous, it may suggest they are pedophilias who beleive in conspiuracy theoryes for example 2) Calling it a conspiracy is f course inherently bias where again anti-lgbt is factually accurate without lacking the journalistic integrity
etc etc.
