-
It's not the job of journalists to wait until someone trips out of their house wearing a swastika. You do research, draw conclusions.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood 0
-
No decent journalist would stand around reiterating stuff as it passes by. You explain, emphasize, pull together.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -1 🙁
-
If you believe a journalist didn't do the work. Doesn't have the facts or drew the wrong conclusion, that's something to criticize.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -4 🙁
-
You don't criticize someone for synthesizing information, or drawing a conclusion. Even the 'view from nowhere' doesn't require that.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +2 🙂
-
And just because that conclusion is alarming or creating anger does not mean it shouldn't be drawn. It means it should.On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -3 🙁
-
Journalists, to quote the SPJ rules of ethics, *seek* the truth and report it.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood 0
-
The 'seek' part is important because it means you don't wait for it to come to you. No one won a Pulitzer waiting for the phone to ring.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 5 Favorites
Mood +4 🙂
-
If core of your criticism is: we should wait for the president to say 'Heil' b/f declaring him a white supremacist, you don't get journalismPermalink On twitter.com
❤️ 5 Favorites
Mood -2 🙁
-
If I was working as a journalist I would never want to work under someone who didn't back my *ability* to draw conclusionsPermalink On twitter.com
❤️ 3 Favorites
Mood +3 🙂