BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 07:05 PM

Most reporters in England anyway are underpaid and overworked, which has always been the case, and is far more so these days. And they work in understaffed local papers.

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 03:34 PM

Upper left corner of the lower 48, to be more precise!

Thanks for the link, guest - it's a gem. I think Russell Baker may have been the guy whose column I used to read in the New York Herald Tribune 30 years ago. His thesis makes a lot of sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 03:07 PM

U. S. Seattle, Washington to be precise. Pacific Northwest, upper left corner of a map of the U. S.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: GUEST,pdc
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 02:47 PM

Don, what country are you in (if you don't mind me asking)?

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 02:39 PM

Most reporters and editors these days don't really know what they are. Dedicated to the journalistic ideal of being "objective," most like to think of themselves as liberals—that is, liberal thinkers—by which they mean "open to all ideas." This does not necessarily mean they are political liberals. The fact remains that Baker is right. They are educated in and live in an environment that isolates them from many of the vicissitudes of the real world and have never had to deal with the unpleasant things that a lot of the population does. Those newsmen who proudly proclaim themselves to be conservative tend to be outright reactionary, like Bill O'Reilly or (if you can even call him a newsman) Rush Limbaugh. Very over the top. I can understand a fairly conservative news reporter or editor being reluctant to identify himself as a conservative because he doesn't want to be regarded as in the same camp with those bozos.

I speak from a measure of experience here. I was the news director of a radio station some years ago, and I still have contact with some of my old newsman buddies.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 02:14 PM

DougR, the right wing media constantly claims that the media is liberal, but they never offer any proof.

Can you?

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: Beverley Barton
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 11:50 AM

You lucky sods! English papers go like this:-

Broadsheets - Agars/school fees/au pairs/angst/fashion

Tabloids -    tits/bums/tits/bums/football.

Subject: RE: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: DougR
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 11:34 AM

Yes, I agree that it is an interesting read. The only thing I would quarrel about is Baker's claim that the majority of newspaper reporters today are conservatives. It is my recollection that studies made within the past few years show that the majority of reporters active today admit to holding the liberal point of view.

DougR

Subject: BS: Need Vaccine for Journalistic Affluenza
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 08:07 AM

Here is a link to a story from the LA Times that discusses the real bias in journalism nowadays--and it isn't exactly what one would expect. The conservative bias in the media today, so the article claims, isn't kowtowing to the corporation as much as it is that journalists, who now come almost exclusively from the upper middle class, are so disconnected from the American people that they just don't get most of the stories they report on--because they have no contact with the daily reality of most of humanity.

Makes for an interesting read:

Affluence remakes the newsroom