September 01, 2004
Here's some food for thought. Watching the mainstream media cover the Republican convention simply reinforces the point. Dan Rather can barely manage to SAY the word "Republican" without a sneer.
I was in J-school almost 30 years ago, but I doubt seriously that it has changed much since. The professors were all flaming liberals and the students not the brightest on campus. The idea of "advocacy journalism" was just coming into vogue and we were TAUGHT that injecting personal opinions, using a spin or a slant in a straight news story were all perfectly okay.
We weren't supposed to REPORT the news. We were supposed to "intrepret" it for the benefit of the great unwashed who couldn't understand it otherwise.
Why do you think so many people in the media are flaming liberals? They were TAUGHT to think that way and they live in a got-dam condom lubricated with self-righteousness to keep them insulated from the real world. They aren't reporters anymore. They are the "News-Givers" and we simple peasant folk are supposed to shut off our brains and listen to THEM. They'll tell us how to think right.
Like most flaming liberals, reporters have no respect for the individual. THEY are important, but you're not. THEY can reason, but you can't. If you disagree with them, you are stupid. And they have the fucking nerve to talk about (ALL HAIL!!!) "diversity," meaning skin color, sex or nationality.
The fact that they almost ALL walk in lock-step to the beat of the same drum doesn't phase them at all. Diversity of THOUGHT isn't welcome in journalism anymore.
While in J-school myself, I remember spending a week working on verb-object combinations to get the slant you wanted from the story.
Example, compare the implications of these two November third headlines: Kerry Loses versus Bush Wins.
Subtle but telling.
Well said, you know, what I think, Cat.
Got that right, Acidman. Right now I'm reading Arthur Gelb's "CIty Room," the story of his career at the NYT, beginning in the 1940s. A constant refrain running through the first chapters is how many of the hard-drinking, hard-smoking newspapermen are adamant about never going to school - "journalism" is a crock. Tell people what happened in the simplest, most straightforward way. Keep the opinions for the editorial page. It's a horribly sad book to read, because Gelb obviously loves the NYT and loves to be a reporter, and you can't help but compare his paper with the feces-sodden rag it is today.
What a change, eh? From "Grey Lady" to "Two Buck Tijuana Donkey Whore."
First of all: J-School? Acid-Man, you commie rat. Was that UGA? Man, they'll let anybody in.
Second: Journalism's always been that way. The devil convinced the world he didn't exist. Watch the old Cary Grant movie, "His Girl Friday". At least they were honest back then about being shills.
P.S. Ripper, why you goin' and insulting Tijuana Donkey Whores? At least they have real jobs!
"journalism" is a crock. Tell people what happened in the simplest, most straightforward way.
That's why the j-school grads in Big Media are so hopping mad about the Internet and blogs. They're being outdone by mere amateurs who never went to j-school. The emperor has no clothes, and it's the Internet that's making people realize it.
Amen, McGehee. The great unwashed are scooping the shit-scoopers and doing it with impunity.
Does my heart good to watch, too.
This is bullshit Rob, you've used every wingnutter talking point known to man to describe journalism.
IF you were taught these things in a bone fide J school it would be a sure sign that you'd ended up in an unaccredited, wingnutter academy of voodoo arts and sciences.
Making stuff up like this really impacts on your credibility.
Cite the school, the classes and the professors and the dates. I'd like to check out this school
Otherwise shut the fuck up ,