July 29, 2008

Coincidence? I think not

"I'm not angry — I'm disappointed. No, wait — I'm angry."

Bill Fosher, former reporter and assignment editor, wrote on July 26:
I am noticing a trend in local reporting toward credulity that makes me want to hurl. [I]t seems that the approach is to do one-source, non-critical stories. If anything, the approach to blunting this seems to be to do a follow up story that provides the same level of credulity and obsequiousness to the opposing view a day or two later.

Efforts at synthesizing information, critical analysis, and good old fashioned truth squadding are down the toilet...
On July 27, Gina adds:
Most newspapers’ pet-related Web logs are nothing but fluff along with ill-informed, poorly reasoned and inexpert commentary.
And on July 28, as if on cue, people! how rad is that? the Unleashed blog at the L.A. Times presents "A Few Words About Pit Bulls":
Few creatures in the animal kingdom seem to generate as much heated comment as pit bulls, but L.A. Unleashed would like to remind readers (and the staff of L.A. Unleashed) that the so-called bully breed has many, many, many defenders.
Yes, we know that if you sign up for a "Google alert" on "animal attacks," many of the headlines involve pit bulls, but it's tough to read the article [on the Vick dogs] in Bark and dismiss the notion of redemption. "The personal stories of dogs -- dogs redeemed from dreadful captivity, with no interest in fighting, joyously learning to be with people -- have touched many hearts."
Who needs research, a truth squad or actual experts when all you have to do is count comments and sign up for Google alerts? I smell Pulitzer!

, we're so glad you could be with us today. Jerry Springer is here to give you the Creation Museum award for excellence in faith-based journalism. "Everyone knows" you're the best! Congratulations, and we'll be looking forward to tomorrow's opposing viewpoint. Hey, a Google alert! Better run!

No comments: