It's amazing how unused to receiving criticism reporters can be. Since writing about the future of journalism in Chicago this week here on Chicagosphere (and my Chicago Carless and Huffington Post Chicago bylines), I've been inundated with comments from reporters telling me that I don't have the right to share my opinion or voice dissent when it comes to reporters...because I'm not a journalist myself. (For example, see Kane County journalist Dan Campana's comments here.) In today's video post I ask my audience, do you think you should believe everything you read just because a reporter writes it?
Should You Believe Everything You Read Just Because a Reporter Writes It?
###
Share this entry:
Subscribe via RSS:
Subscribe via Email:
Follow Mike Doyle on Twitter:
2 Comments
Steven Dahlman said:
Carless, your video response was well-crafted and made sense and the last line got a HEARTY belly laugh outta me.
Whet Moser said:
Mike, you're arguing against a jokey headline, not what Miner wrote. Miner never said to get rid of all columnists:
"writers like Michael Sneed and Richard Roeper"
"celebrity journalists would benefit if freed from the obligation to do a turn every day or two"
"weekly quota of star turns"
etc.
There's a difference between someone with a name and a following who does commentary and an overpaid conventional-wisdom machine like Richard Roeper. Miner's talking about people who don't earn their keep.
Not to mention that your whole "by extension" part of the video above is completely in your mind. Show me where he said anything about bloggers.
If your argument isn't being taken seriously, it's because you're addressing a strawman, not because you're a blogger.
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: