/lit/ - Literature

>>23470243
Oops, new to this site and accidently posted a photo from my "examples of antisemetic memes folder", is there a way to delete this? i love jews and don't want to be antisementic

>>23470243
assuming this is not poor bait to talk shit about Jews as always on this website, the reason why journalists are stupid is because their job is to stupidify information.
They take complex information and make it stupider by chunking it into 1000/1500 words. Length necesities and a paternalistic attitude towards the reader they share with salesmen (thinking readers are stupid, thinking "they know what people want", and all similar thoughts that ended up making people stupid - in the same way as, when you educate a child, if you treat him as if he was retarted he will become retarted) makes it so that journalists write stupid shit slop all the time, and even if they were smart, they would become stupid by having to constantly stupidify information.
New war explodes with complex history and even more complex geopolitical implications? 1500 words, stupidified. New mysterious virus starts global pandemic? Can't read statistics, use black pleague metaphors, 1000 words, a total hit. CERN discovers a new particle? Haven't done math since high school, use the word "black hole" several times, be sure to namedrop quantum mechanics, 800 words, stupidified.
And so on and so forth.

As a general rule for life: if you want to begin being informed on current events, or anything for what matters, you need to read about four books on the subject, which is more or less the equivalent of a university course. Take the war in Palestine: if you wanna learn about this and not just fall for stupid propaganda (mostly on the jew side, but the other side has its stupidification demerits as well) read at least four books about it.
Yes, you do have the time to read four books.
No there is no other source of knowledge, for the simple reason that books are written by experts who sign themselves and offer extensive bibliography and documentation in other forms that you can double check and verify by yourself if you have doubts.
Information you get by books. If you like being angry at imaginary enemies and situations, instagram reels and YouTube channels are fantastic sources of free anger.

>>23470243
My friend was studying journalism but dropped out fast because he said it was lame and gay. I asked why most journalists are so bad at being objective, he said they're taught not to be, because that would be oppressive to BIPOC (not quite). Rather, it was that they had a responsibility to tell people what to think, not just the facts, i.e. they had a duty to not be objective, and all these lower end of the bell curve students eat it up. Unbelievable.

>>23470243
Because the upper levels of those people (their managers) are all literal psychopaths who fire anybody who isn't a retarded bootlicker

>>23470243
Journalists spend too much time in a self referential echo chamber. Besides a few good ones most don't go out anymore and actually talk to real people and investigate actually important things.

>>23470275
The problem with this hypothesis is that journalistic distortion occurs not due to compression but due to deliberate intent to present a particular matter a particular way.

I'd argue that journalism is a lot like historiography. To create any narrative, a writer has to treat the set of all existing facts selectively, he has to subjectively interpret those selectively chosen facts, and the influence of innate biases are impossible to avoid during the act of interpretation.

>>23470313
Plus just like historiography, the real purpose of journalism is not to describe reality, but to create it. To create a desirable future, one has to create a "correctly" interpreted present and past first. There's room to argue that journalism being the way it is is not a bug, but an essential feature, one should strive to make reality conform to one's vision rather than the other way around, if such a thing could even be done, since as described before, there is no reality, but subjective realities, as our perception of reality is but the subjective distillation of a small set of selectively chosen facts rather than objective reality.

Journalists work with the implication that their work means something. Most other writers have already come to terms with the meaningless of their work and do it for passion.

>>23470281
>getting fired if you don't do what you're told
That's called having a job, bud.

Cool, so they actually know that they're subhuman pieces of dogshit enabling oppression? LOL

>>23470275
Fuck Palestine and fuck false Israeli imposters.
>journalists are stupid because they have to dumb their writing down
Ha, you're a journalist? this is an hilarious ass-pull, and a poor excuse for these losers. At least you openly admit that the bar to becoming a journalist is extremely low (just write like as simpleton - they mostly are anyways) and that they disdain their dwindling audience. But your answer is just grasping at straws. Many jobs require you to "stupidify" information, it doesn't turn those people into the subhuman idiots that journalists normally are. Everybody has to "stupidify" their reports at work, in school, when having a conversation, etc.. Apart from the fact that there is no source for this claim (that's fine, i don't care), it seems to me like being able to explain things on multiple levels, going from complex to simple, and vice versa, is something that makes you smarter, but maybe journalists are an anomaly (or maybe they're secretly super high IQ and are merely pretending to be retards, with fucking spelling mistakes in their dogshit articles hahahaha - just kidding).

And "stupidifying" (dumbing down) is the least of their errors: they are not just boneheaded idiots (even the ones I meet in person), they are shit-tier people, in terms of morals and inner nature. There is something about journalism that attracts worm-like idiots like flies 'round shit. Independent journalists are usually marginally better (they have to apply themselves for once in their lives, unlike having their hand held through daycare- i mean their "higher education"), but they still seem like totally mediocre people at best (Tim Pool).

Really, why do these cretins even have jobs? we can go and get all the information firsthand from primary sources for free, why would anybody want to read what these wormy little queers think, much less pay for their tard-ramblings? lying to you or just "accidently" getting things wrong (they are that stupid, of course). Any literate teen on 4chan could do their job better.

If more homeless niggas in the shithole cities keep bashing their heads in and getting let off for free, who can complain? especially when these scumbags partially responsible for the "de-policing" these areas are getting, and the social environment that allows the darker races to act like animals, while anybody speaking up or trying to stop it is instead portrayed as the evildoer.

>>23470275
>use the word "black hole" several times
To be fair, this was a serious concern that wasn't immediately and obviously shown to be a non concern, and potential existential threats resulting from humans doing new things like this should be treated with the utmost seriousness.

>>23470336
>Journalists work with the implication that their work means something.
KEK do they actually think this? we should abuse journalists more. I know for a fact that they lurk this site and influence the moderation to an extent. Journalists are less than shit LOL

>>23470349
>>getting fired if you don't do what you're told
strawman
Those people fire anybody who's smart because they're scare he'll take their job.
I'd hardly call that "not doing your job"

>>23470313
>not due to compression but due to deliberate intent
Second line of my posts states: "Length necesities and a paternalistic attitude towards the reader they share with salesmen [...] makes it so that journalists write stupid shit slop all the time"
Compression is clearly taken into account. And yes there is also the attempt to create narratives, but is not as prominent as simplification and marketing mindset in my opinion. Newspapers need to make publicity to work, and right now social media works best for this kind of stuff, and most people are bounced back to online newspapers articles through the social media pages of the newspapers they follow. In order for stuff to be clicked and reacted to, they need it to be engaging, i.e. stupidified and appealing to your basest instinct, such as getting angry at some police beating or Ben Shapiro character saying something outrageous. Today it seems to me like most news outlets, even those who used to be good ones, work for the most part as clickbait and according to market mechanics.
The main focus is on keeping the reader engaged and having him click on stuff, and I think creating narratives is not as important - although, of course, massive propaganda is made through journalism and journalistic stupidification.

But you can also have good journalism or informative journalism / historiography that creates narrative without being clickbait slop stupidified bullshit - as is the case with many academic studies or, more generally, with books. This to say: the whole discussion about subjectivity and objectivity may impact how good or accurate historical research is, but it is not the main factor for the massive stupidity of current journalism - market mechanics in the current social media environment seem more relevant to me.

>>23470349
this post sounds super schizo, get meds anon

>>23470313
>>23470328
Insightful posts, but journalists are very bad at getting facts right too.
>there is no reality, but subjective realities, as our perception of reality is but the subjective distillation of a small set of selectively chosen facts rather than objective reality.
Maybe if you're going by a certain rigorous/philosophical definition of objective, yes. But facts/data are commonly considered objective, existing outside of the bubble of subjectivity/self. It's clear that journalists are at odds with this from the way they generally behave, so that is a great point to bring up.
>that journalism being the way it is is not a bug, but an essential feature, one should strive to make reality conform to one's vision rather than the other way around
Sounds like the opposite of being a liberal, but obviously i am not under the illusion that journalist worms stick to principles. Ok, but why can't they just report the facts? why all the lying, hiding, slander, ruining people's lives, manipulation/gaslighting, etc.? people want the information, not their midwit/anti-White/hateful spin on the working class.

Really, if you're a journalist, you should reflect for once in your life upon the fact that people hate you so much.

>>23470355
>KEK do they actually think this?
Of course, have you not seen the language headlines use today? They've gone from descriptive to prescriptive. From "X happened to Y person" to "X happening to Y person is a bad thing, and here's why". Go and watch an interview with someone from the past few years, and I guarantee there is one question where the journalist begins with stating their opinion.

>>23470378
Dude he refuted you

>>23470371
That's the same in many fields. I've worked with alcoholic dropouts and subsaharan halfwits who are more competent and thoughtful than the average journalist

>>23470378
>no argument
>hears through a screen, calls others schizo
Thanks for sharing your valued opinion. Hopefully you're a journalist and this thread ruins your day LOL, they deserve it.

>>23470413
>That's the same in many fields
But journalism is the most prominent example of talent being fired and retards being in demand

>>23470336
Yet another parallel with historiography. "Responsible" history, and fighting the "abuse" of history have been huge since the mid-2010s.

>>23470408
HAHAHAHAHAH

They really are the lowest of the low. This place is way too pozzed for it now, but 4chan or /pol/ or whatever could run an e-campaign to bully journalists into leaving the internet or just shit on them endlessly on twitter, just for kicks, y'know? You know these little faggots are lurking all the time, and that nazi incel chuds or whatever the fuck are living in their empty little simpleton skulls, rent-free.

>>23470426
They're so impotent and obsolete that they have to grant themselves authority. Heaven forbid they accurately and dispassionately report facts, instead of the 10^10th article on how the fall of Drumpf is right around the corner (for real this time). And did you hear? Nazi Fascist Putin/Russia are running out of ammo and fuel and are going to lose Ukraine next week! Hahahaha, these fucking rats are so stupid and shameless. I'm serious, abuse these cocksuckers, they deserve it.

>>23470352
>this was a serious concern that wasn't immediately and obviously shown to be a non concern
No it wasn't, you fell for media hype if you believe this. Even the most "likely" hypothesis (stable strangelets of low velocity) was ruled out immediately the first time anyone actually did a back-of-the-envelope calculation on cosmic ray collision rates.

Because its literally their job to have no intellectual integrity

>There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

>There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

>The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

>We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.