Skip to main content

View Diary: NYT reporter under attack for blasting Bush, right wing (194 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A reporter who does this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Canadian Reader, BenGoshi, corvo

    Journalism demands reporters to put their personal feelings aside about controverisal topics they cover.

    Writes nothing of value to anyone.

    Nobody goes into journalism to be a stenographer.

    Gunter glieben glauchen globen

    by quaoar on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:25:52 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not a stenographer (0+ / 0-)

      You miss my point. Of course reporters should do more than just regurgitate what was said, and that includes fact-checking and truth-squadding. A lot more of that should happen than does.

      BUT, the reader has to be able to be trust that the fact-checking is not one-sided. And now, if Ms. Greenhouse writes an article about Guantanamo, it won't matter how accurate and factual it is, because the right wing will be able to say "She's biased, look at what she said earlier about Guantanamo."

      They won't even have to prove that the article is inaccruate; it doesn't even have to be inaccurate ... she has compromised her ability to report on that topic. Anything she writes about it now can be dismissed more easily by the right.

      I don't even think journalists like David Gregory should double as pundits on Sunday morning. The viewer watching Gregory question Bush at a press conference should not have any idea whether Gregory privately loves or hates the man. The viewer should only know that Gregory will ask a cogent, intelligent question and press for an answer.

      I'm not saying reporters don't or should not have strong opinions. But reporters should not be too open about expressing those opinions on topics they cover. It sucks sometimes, but it is a part of the job and people who can't do it should look into other lines of work.

      •  You suggest (5+ / 0-)

        BUT, the reader has to be able to be trust that the fact-checking is not one-sided.

        You suggest that the reader can trust the fact-checking as long as he/she does not know how the reporter feels about the subject he/she is writing about. That's ridiculous.

        You don't gain trust in a newspaper or a reporter by being ignorant of how journalists feel. You gain that trust by reading it day after day and seeing how the stories stand up to challenge and actual events. People who write bullshit don't last very long unless they have compromising Polaroids of the publisher.

        Gunter glieben glauchen globen

        by quaoar on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:57:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site