Bookmark and Share
My Photo

FROM the EDITORS:

  • IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.

NEW & UPCOMING, available from IGNATIUS PRESS







































































« Reviewed | Main | The Task of Accuratizing »

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Comments

Ed Peters

When I tell occasional stories of how completely stupid most MSM reporters are about religion, a fair number of people think I am making them up to be funny. But I am not. Like the TV news reporter sent to interview my bishop in 95 but who, in 1995 mind you, did not know who the pope was, and that it was Paul 6.

Tiny light at end of dark tunnel: The number of MSM types who have unofficially asked me to fact-check a few things is slightly up the last year or so.

Carl, imho, your piece was not only NOT hypercritical, it was not even hyperreactive (you're not irish enough to be hyper-reactive).
Admitting what follows is a judgment call, don't falsely concede a little point just to across as reasonable. admit mistakes (if they were mistakes), concede unessentials (if they are unessential), but don't concede even little truths (if they are true).

and the truth is, your peice was immune to charge of being hyper-reactive.

if that makes an sense as i put it.

MMajor Fan

I agree with you Carl, and also with Ed's comments. I'd like to add, not to be the total cynic about human nature lol, but I know for a fact that many correspondents also use that "aw shucks" attitude about gathering background as camouflage, because they have a pre set agenda and no intention of collecting actual facts, background, or context.

Cristina A. Montes

When I was deciding college majors, I was thinking of journalism. My father advised me to take up the Humanities, telling me that it's easy to learn how to write; what matters more is to learn something to write about and how to think. I followed his advice, although I still write, I didn't become a journalist -- after the usual early 20s drifting, I went to law school and just recently passed the bar exams in my second attempt. One thing I realized, though, is that good journalism, like law, requires the ability to do research and the ability to think on your feet. It also has the additional requirement of being able to communicate complex ideas accurately in a way that the general public will understand.

I find it unfortunate that there's a widespread notion that journalists can be sloppy intellectually, especially given the social impact of the profession.

Ed Peters

CAM, congrats on the Bar.

Cristina A. Montes

Ed Peters: Thanks a lot!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight

Twitter


Ignatius Press


Catholic World Report


WORTHY OF ATTENTION:




















Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad