Skip to main content

View Diary: NY Times Asks Readers Whether it Should Tell the Truth (189 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  agreed. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    we have not had real journalism from the conventional, established media for some time.

    but because the media isn't doing its job doesn't mean the definition of journalism changes to mean "reporting the TRUTH"

    i think the New York Times actually blew it with the question
    because Brisbane doesn't seem to understand a reporter's role:

    I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

    Reporters are reporting: relaying information with as little bias and judgement as possible (because some slant is bound to get in any story, we are human... just look at the bible. i mean when you can mess around with the word of god, well, i'm just saying).

    Due diligence is required and sometimes, reporter's miss things, have deadlines, or can't find things. But they can always call someone on the other side of the issue (someone known) to comment. At the very least, they must do that.

    but the wicket is sticky with the causes of climate change, for example. all a reporter can do is present science from competing sides (as there are, apparently, competing theories by holders of degrees).

    of course, as an op/ed writer, you'd have much more latitude, including questioning the value of those with degrees...

    As an Op-Ed columnist, Mr. Krugman clearly has the freedom to call out what he thinks is a lie. My question for readers is: should news reporters do the same?

    but, Mr. Brisbane, reporters are not op/ed columnists. now are they?

    •  Right. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Brisbane's appeal is silly, and a little distubing, but it's for the reasons you are bringing up in this thread-- not because we need reporters interpreting the truth value of public statements as a rule. because we don't.

    •  yes (0+ / 0-)

      but in an effort of putting all the facts out front on climate change,  a reporter could point out that in all the research and interviews, there are four people with actual degrees in the area that question climate change theory as it now stands and 842 that agree with the theory and that the four people that challenge it all work at the same think tank owned by a oil company owner's private foundation.    Bias of the speaker is always something that can be part of the background the reporter gives.  If a reporter is anything more than a stenographer that is.

      Would Watergate ever have unravelled if the reporters stopped with the Nixon Adminstration denies all knowledge and the paper refused to print all the background information they dug up?  That is basically all today's press would do.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site