Read on Twitter
Have journalists finally learnt how to challenge political lies? | Financial Times
“If journalists deny airtime to lies, they will incentivise politicians to tell the truth. That might just increase trust in both professions.”
So simple. So effective https://www.ft.com/content/43cd32d6-9954-4b60-85bd-621d0ce5e77b
“If journalists deny airtime to lies, they will incentivise politicians to tell the truth. That might just increase trust in both professions.”
So simple. So effective https://www.ft.com/content/43cd32d6-9954-4b60-85bd-621d0ce5e77b
I shall wait & see if the lesson sticks here and in the US, given who controls the press, the too powerful grip the Government has in the BBC AND the willingness of some journalists to publish lies, deliberately or lazily promoting them for clicks
WE should deny THEM OUR airtime
WE should deny THEM OUR airtime
“In part,,letting falsehoods pass was lazy journalism, in a profession that traditionally privileges access over accuracy.
..Though most media opposed Trump, it’s also true that media made him...Trump’s inventions were allowed to drive the news agenda.”
..Though most media opposed Trump, it’s also true that media made him...Trump’s inventions were allowed to drive the news agenda.”
“Once media’s energy is spent debating whether falsehood is true, truth has already lost”
That is exactly why false equivalence and allowing liars airtime is so very very dangerous.
News outlets should do some urgent soul searching about the part they have played in division
That is exactly why false equivalence and allowing liars airtime is so very very dangerous.
News outlets should do some urgent soul searching about the part they have played in division
“The new journalistic approach isn’t so much “speak truth to power” as “force power to speak truth to us”. ...
“Ideally anyone disseminating falsehood won’t get invited back”
It means journalists have to be well briefed to spot and rebut the six lies crammed into a 90 seconds.
“Ideally anyone disseminating falsehood won’t get invited back”
It means journalists have to be well briefed to spot and rebut the six lies crammed into a 90 seconds.
It was so effective when @piersmorgan and @GMB replayed the clip of Trump saying they could inject disinfectant to Farage who had adamantly denied it was said at all.
If this happened constantly they might think twice about lying.
If this happened constantly they might think twice about lying.
Oh yes. The referendum debates. What a part bad journalism played in spreading all those lies that are now painfully and colourfully coming home to roost.
I don’t think it right that journalists should say that most economic models are wrong. That is also sloppy journalism.
I don’t think it right that journalists should say that most economic models are wrong. That is also sloppy journalism.
Economic models are based on a range of scenarios, just as Covid modelling.
The modellers’ models reliability will depend upon the certainty about future context. The more uncertain (as with Brexit given the lack of certainty about models) the less certain the outcome.
The modellers’ models reliability will depend upon the certainty about future context. The more uncertain (as with Brexit given the lack of certainty about models) the less certain the outcome.
And life throws doozies. Like a worldwide pandemic. That would throw most (all) economic models out.
But, yes, far more from well informed freight handlers, tradesmen, shop keepers and FAR more trenchancy from those who represent them.
But, yes, far more from well informed freight handlers, tradesmen, shop keepers and FAR more trenchancy from those who represent them.
Experts have to learn to communicate their expertise in ways that can be understood.
I was often left wondering if they thought a particular scenario just a little bit bad or terrible, given how hedged and restrained the responses were.
I was often left wondering if they thought a particular scenario just a little bit bad or terrible, given how hedged and restrained the responses were.
