Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

truebluegreen

(9,033 posts)
36. No--he shouldn't have gotten an "opposing view" quote
Mon Jun 15, 2015, 11:31 PM
Jun 2015

and then printed "both sides" if that is what you are implying. The "some people say" and "other people say" is as bad as being a stenographer (case in point: global warming scientists v deniers). When you give equal weight to both sides and one side is simply wrong or worse, LYING, you have done the public a disservice. That's not journalism, it's bullshit.

I don't want reporters to editorialize, I want them to report the facts, and the facts need to be more than "X said this, and Y said that." Otherwise all you have is Chuck Toad.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

. AuntPatsy Jun 2015 #1
That bullshit article Aerows Jun 2015 #11
Author of That Horrible Snowden Article Has Even Worse CNN Interview Wilms Jun 2015 #2
That interview was unreal Aerows Jun 2015 #27
Anybody, and I mean anybody, could have just made up that story. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #31
He's not a reporter, he's a scribe CanonRay Jun 2015 #77
MUST WATCH /\ G_j Jun 2015 #62
I really don't want "reporters" to MADem Jun 2015 #3
But in this case, he didn't seek out the other side of the story ...... marmar Jun 2015 #4
I agree--he should have gotten an "opposing view" quote. There's more here, certainly. MADem Jun 2015 #9
No--he shouldn't have gotten an "opposing view" quote truebluegreen Jun 2015 #36
Where did I say anything about giving equal weight? If a reporter goes to one source MADem Jun 2015 #46
I apologize. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #48
We're fine--I like a nice chat! No worries. nt MADem Jun 2015 #55
No, they are supposed to ferret out the truth. Facts are facts in that world. cui bono Jun 2015 #8
Most excellent post! Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #14
Why thank you. cui bono Jun 2015 #43
They aren't supposed to give us their OPINIONS on what "the truth" is. MADem Jun 2015 #16
I never said that. I said they are supposed to get the facts. cui bono Jun 2015 #19
I didn't say you said that. Can't I have an opinion on the process? MADem Jun 2015 #24
Of course you can, but you were responding directly to my post. cui bono Jun 2015 #25
People like to fight here on DU. I'd rather talk about what is happening in the world. MADem Jun 2015 #53
Yes, people do. cui bono Jun 2015 #68
I know. MADem Jun 2015 #69
Cool. cui bono Jun 2015 #71
The original article made no sense. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #32
I think it was a piece of bloody, fatty meat tied to a line and thrown off the back of the boat. MADem Jun 2015 #56
I disagree that they wouldn't fall on their swords Aerows Jun 2015 #60
I don't think the reform is all that much of a surprise, and I thought the timing had more to do MADem Jun 2015 #64
Uh, speaking of SF86's blowing up in people's faces ... Aerows Jun 2015 #65
I agree with that, too. The oversight stunk on ice. There's a lot of entrenched idiocy. MADem Jun 2015 #66
I started a post on it Aerows Jun 2015 #70
I wondered if this was part of the larger problem, as well... MADem Jun 2015 #72
Kind of looks necessary Aerows Jun 2015 #73
They could reissue SSANs. It would be a big job, but not insurmountable. MADem Jun 2015 #74
They are covering something up or someone else in the complex web of private contractors JDPriestly Jun 2015 #78
The Chinese and Russians do it differently than we do--they put their hackers in uniform. MADem Jun 2015 #79
There is just some information that should not be placed on any computer system. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #80
If they KNOW that people are gonna play games and screw around, they should bite the bullet and MADem Jun 2015 #86
I totally agree. There is no excuse for the sloppiness involved in this scandal no matter JDPriestly Jun 2015 #88
Here we go. This is what happened to the personnel information in the US: JDPriestly Jun 2015 #101
Fact checking is fine, too. But it's more of a challenge when you agree to quote a source MADem Jun 2015 #35
Journalism 101: if you have only one unattributed source, Don't Go To Print with it. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #38
That hasn't been the standard for years. I don't think it would be a bad idea to go back to it, MADem Jun 2015 #49
Just because a source says something doesn't make it the truth. cui bono Jun 2015 #41
That is true. Judith Miller, etc. MADem Jun 2015 #51
No shit, end of discussion of who, what, when, where, why and for added value HOW!!! mrdmk Jun 2015 #84
Made me think of this: cui bono Jun 2015 #89
Yep, there is some bullshit happening somewhere! mrdmk Jun 2015 #103
Actually. They should be investigators. What people are saying are not necessarily facts. Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #12
I've no problem with investigative reporting, either. MADem Jun 2015 #17
Oh give it up. You were on the poopy-head band wagon until the reporter revealed himself Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #20
Not at all. As I've said, I think this is a long game. MADem Jun 2015 #37
No offense, MADem Aerows Jun 2015 #21
I definitely served and retired! MADem Jun 2015 #29
It's rather farfetched Aerows Jun 2015 #33
I am not saying that either. MADem Jun 2015 #39
Addendum Aerows Jun 2015 #42
Fair point...and you can add "candidate" to that as well! nt MADem Jun 2015 #47
You certainly can Aerows Jun 2015 #57
To pretend that reporters are objective, impartial and without an agenda is at best naive...nt Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #30
I don't say they are. I say the ones that are worthy of any respect should strive for that ideal. nt MADem Jun 2015 #45
Yeah that is the problem with garbage pundits, that is exactly what they do. Rex Jun 2015 #66
That is one of the most FlatBaroque Jun 2015 #75
Well, your mind is made up and have a nice day. See you in Nov of next year--if you're still here. MADem Jun 2015 #87
Seriously? Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #81
Read the thread. I didn't say that. In fact, I said the opposite. MADem Jun 2015 #85
I responded to what you wrote. If you managed to backtrack and revise that nonsense so what? Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #93
Don't you dare read the full conversation... MADem Jun 2015 #94
Provable falsehoods are not a side, imo Babel_17 Jun 2015 #92
Please read the full conversation, which took place a day before you decided to chime in. MADem Jun 2015 #95
Please don't make assumptions (and I'm not wild about the "chime in" dig) Babel_17 Jun 2015 #96
I knew someone would be here to stick up for shitty reporting and sloppy propaganda. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2015 #98
Really? Tuesday? MADem Jun 2015 #99
No idea what you're talking about, but my question was strictly a courtesy--no hidden meaning. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2015 #100
Correct. Someone who simply hands readers what the government handed him or her is merrily Jun 2015 #5
They are a mouthpiece Aerows Jun 2015 #18
And now, we have a law that says our government can propagandize us. Considering networks were merrily Jun 2015 #23
It's no secret "Media" all around the world Alittleliberal Jun 2015 #50
Stenographers. NewSystemNeeded Jun 2015 #6
LMAO! Aerows Jun 2015 #7
This is good for a larf.. frylock Jun 2015 #10
First thing that came to mind when I saw that interview. Luminous Animal Jun 2015 #13
If you look at who rec'd it Aerows Jun 2015 #44
I know Aerows Jun 2015 #15
LMAO 840high Jun 2015 #34
I knew exactly! what post that was without even looking. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #40
so did I! nt m-lekktor Jun 2015 #61
That's pretty damn funny Doctor_J Jun 2015 #54
Classic! The "epitome of the genre". Zorra Jun 2015 #102
See up thread, "reporters should be stenographers". Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #82
Now where is everyone who started screeching SNOWDEN TRAITOR(TM)!!! all over again? daredtowork Jun 2015 #22
Not gullible schmucks Aerows Jun 2015 #26
Let me join you Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #58
That was pretty obvious. Another mindless tool posing as a 'reporter'. sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #28
He did his job Man from Pickens Jun 2015 #52
"I vas just following orders." Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2015 #59
The Sunday Times sends DMCA notice to critics of Snowden hacking story Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #63
Sick and lazy reporting. Baitball Blogger Jun 2015 #76
Shouldn't we all trust our government? See GWB and IWR for solution to quiz. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2015 #83
Oh, so now DU has gone back to hating anon gov't sources again?? Blue_Tires Jun 2015 #90
Stenography was his minor, and he aced it (nt) Babel_17 Jun 2015 #91
Recommend...saw an interview with him...sheesh..... KoKo Jun 2015 #97
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Reporter Who Wrote Times ...»Reply #36