SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (9261)11/7/2001 1:33:35 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
The Washington Post aims for a journalism that checks its fact basis

How the Washington Post would headline this item:

WORLD TO END ON MONDAY. WOMEN AND MINORITIES MOST AFFECTED



To: JohnM who wrote (9261)11/7/2001 2:49:59 PM
From: Selectric II  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Hmm. Wasn't looking for a provocative response, really, but what is the fact basis for your assertions that the Washington Times just aims to be right wing, while The Washington Post is journalism that checks its fact basis? Do you have a credible source for that?

Also, it seems to me that media that allegedly "checks its fact basis" but distorts the facts so as to inject their own agenda, while disguising it as fact-reporting, can be more dangerous and dishonest than someone who tells you where they're coming from. Your lumping The Washington Times and Fox News together as "not constrained by journalistic ethics" appears to expose your political prejudices rather than their journalistic ethics.

Incidentally, The Washington Times might be owned by Moonies, but those who write for it aren't. Similarly, most of the Fox News people I've seen on the air have appeared on the other networks previously, and some of them appear on multiple networks at once. I doubt that a lack of journalistic ethics is either a Washington Times or a Fox News hiring requirement. <g>