News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by malloryerik on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @02:50AM (#27512139)
Oh it's not a leaked video, it's an interview of an audiovisual technician done by Project Veritas, who are among the most biased and cynically named outfits in journalism. Cynically named (veritas is Latin for "truth") because they don't try to make their message correspond to reality (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/), but instead go to great pains to twist, alter, edit and selectively curate reality to fit their message. They're permanently suspended from Twitter. In my mind they are enemies of the truth. They were fertilizing the soil for the Big Lie before the 2020 US elections, spreading their deceitful manure into the minds of the vulnerable. Please watch more of their work.

From MediaBiasFactCheck: > Project Veritas was created by James Edward O’Keefe III, an American conservative political activist. He produces secretly recorded undercover audio and video encounters, some selectively edited to imply its subjects said things they did not, with figures and workers in academic, governmental, and social service organizations, purporting to show abusive or allegedly illegal behavior by employees and/or representatives of those organizations. Project Veritas primarily targets liberals and liberal organizations.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/project-veritas/

Meanwhile the person interviewed was a technical director, as I understand it meaning an audiovisual equipment guy, so I don't know why you'd consider him an authority on editorial decisions. That all media has some bias doesn't seem so shocking, but rather mere common sense.

Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by pjc50 on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @03:03AM (#27512206)
It's amazing how people will go from "mainstream media has bias" to "... but this random guy on Youtube doesn't!" despite the youtuber being far worse. As if they can only handle one level of critical thinking.
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by seaorg on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @03:25AM (#27512317)
The only people dumber than that are people who straw-man…
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by Nursie on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @04:13AM (#27512580)
But that’s exactly what you’ve just done.
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by orwin on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @03:15AM (#27512269)
My brother used to be a sound technician (and sound engineer on a lot of non-paid projects), and was named technical director on a small TV plateau during a cold epidemic, because his (our) family name came first in the technician list, and the 3 higher ranked/paid employees were sick.
[dead]
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by Nursie on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @06:29AM (#27513306)
> Technical director is certainly not a low title

Could be, depends on the organisation. I've met "Executive Directors" at major banks who had a team of 20 people and "Vice Presidents" who were effectively dev team leads with 5 guys working for them in a company of hundreds of thousands.

In the context of a TV news channel, it could be basically anyone. He could be responsible for making sure the weather desk have the correct lighting setup.

It seems you have been misled by a partisan hack.

Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by malloryerik on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @11:08AM (#27516593)
It's certainly not an editorial title.

Technical Director (CNN) https://www.warnerbroscareers.com/find-jobs/?184412BR

Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by Nursie on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @11:18AM (#27516742)
Yeah, sounds like mid-level technical role with some on-shift people-management thrown in, not editorial and not in the boardroom either.
Re:Avoid News, Part 2: What the Stock Market Taught Me about... by MikeUt on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @07:32AM (#27513760)
> but instead go to great pains to twist, alter, edit and selectively curate reality to fit their message.

The video had long segments without cuts, that seemed to include enough context. Do you have any examples from that video in mind as to how it could have been misleading despite this?

> Meanwhile the person interviewed was a technical director, as I understand it meaning an audiovisual equipment guy, so I don't know why you'd consider him an authority on editorial decisions.

If I recall correctly, he only spoke of his first-hand experiences. So even if he were just a janitor, that would not cast doubt on his claims.