| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
balanced coverage?balanced coverage?Posted Apr 11, 2011 22:45 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433)In reply to: balanced coverage? by pjm Parent article: Groklaw shutting down in May
Since when did *accurate* and *balanced* go together?
The problem with modern reporting is that, if the issue under discussion is black-and-white with only one sensible position, the media feel *obliged* to give "balance" by quoting some kook with a clearly unhinged agenda, but they quote him in all seriousness!
Fortunately, gravity was discovered many years ago, otherwise the press would be fawning all over "karmic levitation" to try to give "balance" to the "alleged discovery"!
Cheers,
(Log in to post comments)
balanced coverage? Posted Apr 12, 2011 22:27 UTC (Tue) by pjm (subscriber, #2080) [Link]
People do sometimes mention the word balance when criticizing the journalistic fault that Wol describes, but it's pretty clear that groklaw is *far* from having that fault, and I doubt that that's what brianomahoney meant when praising PJ's balance.
However, given the slanging match that seems to have swallowed the rest of the comments on this article, I don't think we'll gain much by discussing ideals in journalism any further here.
|
|
||||||||||||