I used to really like HuffPo -- a good place for liberal news. But the place is quickly becoming a cesspool of tabloid "journalism," vain validation-seeking, and totally unquestioned identity politics.
Printable View
I used to really like HuffPo -- a good place for liberal news. But the place is quickly becoming a cesspool of tabloid "journalism," vain validation-seeking, and totally unquestioned identity politics.
You mean...The Huffing And Puffington Post?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultralight
Yeah, that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
HuffPo is what happens when you don't want to employ real journalists in an organization that pretends to be a news source. Faux News is no different.
I'm wondering what happened to the Salon site, too. Haven't been there in many months and when I clicked on it yesterday it seemed pretty shallow. Maybe just a bad news day?
I know investigative reporting costs money, and so I do send money to certain publications that I'd like to see continue, but it's getting harder to get that in-depth real journalism.
I particularly like al Jazeera and the BBC, and have them in my newsfeed.
if Faux news really run by the same model? I don't think so, but perhaps I am wrong. How I understand the Huntington Post is run is they solicit freelance contributions, I think Faux has actual employees. And this is important because yes the model itself of how the Huntington post was run is broken by it's very nature, it's no way to run a news organization. Another organization that I believe is run by the same model as Huffington Post is Forbes (and hey it is a nice right leaning site to point out in order to be uh ... fair and balanced).Quote:
HuffPo is what happens when you don't want to employ real journalists in an organization that pretends to be a news source. Faux News is no different.
To be technical, yes, HuffPo enlists freelancers (of questionable journalistic cred) and Faux News supplies W2s to its contributors.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
But in both cases the focus is shifted away quietly from being a source of news that meets even the most -- umm -- liberal journalistic standard. Faux maintained more than once over the last year or two that their on-air "news" people were "entertainers" and, therefore, exempt from being moored by facts or any real sense of integrity.
The only real difference is from which side of the political spectrum the stones are being flung.
I don't think I ever read Huffpo, but it was regularly trashed on a podcast I listened to -- Skeptics Guide to the Universe -- for its favorable coverage, or promotion, of homopathy and such. If I didn't read them during my hardcore progressive years, I don't think I'd start as a disgruntled libertarian! :laff:
Some papers have an opinion section. All news has a bias as a press is only free, if you own the press. Huffpo, is just a large opinion section, not a facts and figures section.