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.
Just for clarity my **opinion** is that the articles bias and the conclusions that leads to is likely one I agree with... I mean there is no shortage of conspiracy theorists in the right, so it is very likely an opinion I likely would agree with... It still has absolutely no place in a news article.
@freemo @MichaelPorter @kdorse I’m back. This will be long.
The main argument you’re making is that having a bias precludes producing responsible journalism. I don’t agree. Yes, PressProgress probably doesn’t publish a lot of anti-NDP articles, if any. So I won’t look to them for articles that are critical to the left. The great thing about the internet is that there are lots of other sources out there.
But if they publish a story that states facts, gives sources, and exposes information that is important to me (as this is, I live in the city that attracts these occupations), then that is valuable journalism.
(You’re taking a hard line for objectivity, but there is no such thing. We’re all hairless apes constructing our own realities out of extremely limited sensory data with a brain that likes to make up stories so we can find food and mates, and avoid danger.)
The rest of this seems to be differing opinions on the meaning of terms.
On the name of the organization, “PressProgess”: This is a progressive journalism outfit. The name fits. It’s not too boring. Try convincing any new organization trying to attract subscribers that they will succeed with an unexciting, straight-down-the-middle name and they will laugh you out of the boardroom. “18% Grey News! Not too dark, not too light. Perfect and featureless!”
> I’m back. This will be long.
No worries, you seem to be polite and arguing in good faith I think... So please take all the space you need.
> The main argument you’re making is that having a bias precludes producing responsible journalism.
I am not saying that at all, though I can see why you might think that as what I am saying is subtly but critically different.
What I am saying is that when you **intentionally** encode bias into your news as a feature... which is what you do when you label news as "for progressives" and choose intentionally loaded language.. only then does it preclude responsible journalism. A person who is simply biased but goes out of their way to do their best that those biases dont influence their reporting, in those cases they can be very responsible. But that not what we have here, we have a news agency who prides itself on being biased and offers it as a feature, intentionally.
> But if they publish a story that states facts, gives sources, and exposes information that is important to me (as this is, I live in the city that attracts these occupations), then that is valuable journalism.
Should be... but when there is intentional bias encoded as a feature when they do it then you are getting that information with intentional brain washing.. words matter, and when the news is presented with highly loaded and opinionated language sprinkled throughout the feed your hate, you wind up walking away a worse person, even if facts are sprinkled with it, you are effected by the news by being a worse human being, you just got some facts as you got it... It also means that almost always facts that are counter to the agenda wont ever reach the spotlight. So while you get facts, you get incomplete facts designed to persuade you to a conclusion rather than to inform you fairly.
> (You’re taking a hard line for objectivity, but there is no such thing. We’re all hairless apes constructing our own realities out of extremely limited sensory data with a brain that likes to make up stories so we can find food and mates, and avoid danger.)
There is a huge difference between people being flawed and being unable to achieve perfect objectability vs intentionally being bias and baking that into your news as a feature rather than an accidental effect.
> The rest of this seems to be differing opinions on the meaning of terms.
Not about the meaning of terms at all, its about the use of loaded language indenting to show intentional bias.
> “PressProgess”: This is a progressive journalism outfit. The name fits.
Yes the name fits, and makes quite clear they have the intention of being biased.. that bias is the goal, not a side effect.. thats the problem.. the fact that the name fits is exactly why they have no journalistic integrity.
> Try convincing any new organization trying to attract subscribers that they will succeed with an unexciting, straight-down-the-middle name and they will laugh you out of the boardroom. “18% Grey News! Not too dark, not too light. Perfect and featureless!”
You are absolutely right.. delivering news with journalistic integrity wont succeed.. That is exactly the problem. I dont blame them for selling out and becoming a propaganda machine, any business man would, its the same reason Fox news exists, its just good business.... This is exactly why for-profit news should already have you suspicious fromt he get go.. you cant maximize profit and actually have journalistic integrity, because thats not what people want.
This is exactly why the few good objective news agencies are all non-profit agencies... because they can focus on doing good journalism, not how popular they are.
Enjoying a debate is fine.. if you take a contrary position for fun all I ask is you make it clear you are doing that... just say your playing devils advocate... Otherwise I may think you beleive a thing, and while I will respect you as long s you are respectful, I , liek anyone, will judge your character based on your opinions.. so you should want to give me an accurate picture of you so I can judge you accurately :)
@freemo @kdorse Like I said, I’m being genuine for this one. 👍🏻
I'm not sure if it was the Debate Club training, or my personality, but I’m always looking for both sides of an issue, trying to seek out my blind spots. It's the only way I can be confident in my final (mostly) conclusions. That tendency used to drive my girlfriend crazy…
No worries, it was good chatting with you. Feel free to pick it up tomorrow. Sleep well.
