Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members resign

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by phkahler on Friday July 24, 2020 @10:06AM (#23939649)

The press needs to behave too. They need to report, not sensationalize. They need to be objective, not politically active. And when given the opportunity to sit before a president addressing a global crisis, and then granted the opportunity to ask questions they should not inject their bias and call him a racist. When subsequently shut down "you're a terrible reporter" the rest of the press should not claim they are being attacked.

It all boils down to defining the roles (on all sides) and then doing that job. It's when government, press, companies, or individuals make light of their responsibility that things fall appart.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by voganmother42 on Friday July 24, 2020 @10:29AM (#23939949)

Calling someone a terrible reporter didn’t shut anything down, and it is an attack (on a person not even an action).

Don’t answer the question, or call it out as a poor question.

There are many sources of news and media.

Name calling and attacks are not coming from just one side, but this doesn’t seem like an honest appraisal of how roles are being filled so much as just tribal finger pointing.

Where is the alternative or proposed solution? The person who possesses one of the biggest platforms and with the most reach in the world cannot articulate anything more substantive than complaining of persecution?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by phkahler on Friday July 24, 2020 @11:51AM (#23940932)

The initial attack came from the reporter. Even if true it was totally off topic. He also asked a relevant question which was answered.

I found the exchange petty on both sides, but the media made much more of it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by shuntress on Friday July 24, 2020 @10:26AM (#23939910)

"The press needs to behave too. They need to report, not sensationalize. They need to be objective, not politically active."

This is not accurate.

The free press has the freedom to report however they want. That is the whole point of the free press.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by regularfry on Friday July 24, 2020 @10:53AM (#23940192)

How a free press operate and what the people need are not necessarily aligned. The populace needs the sum total of the free press to result in something approximating objectivity. If that's not happening, the people aren't being served by the concept of a free press.

If all you've got is two sensationalising ends and nothing in the middle, it's very difficult to tell what's going on. Worse, if you've got one broadly accurate and reliable wing opposed by a group who will intentionally exaggerate, lie, and demonise, and the public think the truth is actually somewhere in the middle, the latter group win.

What's not clear or easy is how you might go about cleaning up such a situation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by growse on Friday July 24, 2020 @11:21AM (#23940544)

If the people's needs aren't being served by the existing media, part of the 'free' bit of 'free press' is the fact that anyone can be a journalist. They can research, write and publish stories to fill any gap. The internet enables this even more than has historically been possible.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by regularfry on Friday July 24, 2020 @11:34AM (#23940722)

The problem in the latter case isn't solved by adding more journalists.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Editorial board of Index and more than 70 staff members r... by adamsea on Friday July 24, 2020 @12:36PM (#23941513)

> ... when given the opportunity to sit before a president addressing a global crisis, and then granted the opportunity to ask questions they should not inject their bias and call him a racist.

Look - I know it's hard to say this and remove the judgement from the statement, and I certainly do have my own judgement in play here, but, empirically speaking, President Donald Trump is racist. Or at the very least someone who consistently makes racist statements over time. And at that point what's the difference?

So w/regards to that I think reporters should have been saying that more, tbh. Let's review the facts:

1. Trump's comments about The Central Park 5, back in the day. 2. Trump's pivotal role in racist birther conspiracy theories about former President Obama. 3. Trump's racist language about Mexicans / Latinos, U.S. judges who happen to be Latino, his coded racist dog-whistle language about cities like Baltimore, Chicago, etc. 4. "Very fine people." 5. Every single thing he's done since the murder of George Floyd.

And I'm sure there's more.

[ Parent | on HN ]