Re: Style gettting in the way of clear reporting

At 12:40 AM 7/8/96, James A. Donald wrote:

>When news media were concentrated into fewer and fewer hands during
>the twentieth century, the appearance of neutrality, objectivity,
>and authoritativeness became a major selling point, and so media
>adopted a tone and manner of neutrality, with an accompanying
>"just-the-facts" style, though in reality they became far less neutral

An interesting point. You are probably right that journalism is becoming
more florid as "amateurs" flood the market. However, I don't quite buy the
concentration argument, as things were pretty concentrated in the Hearst
era, and the explosion of magazines in the past few decades has not been as
concentrated. (In any case, these are hard things to quantify without more
research, which I for one am unlikely to pursue.)

>Now that everyone can grab the megaphone, people are not so worried
>about objectivity.  If something is unfair to Nazis or blacks or evil
>polluting capitalists, they know they will hear about it from the
>Nazis, the blacks or the evil polluting capitalists.
>
>As a result, people no longer value the superficial appearance of
>neutrality and objectivity.  Suddenly colorful and openly biased
>reporting has become popular.

I still think of "The Wall Street Journal" and "The Economist," two of my
favorites, as being _careful_ in their reporting (careful is different from
unbiased). But my main focus in this thread was on the _styles_, and this I
think is more explained by faddishness.

And advertising. To get "mind space," as with "shelf space," the packaging
must entice, fool, and trick the reader.

>This has led to some people engaging in florid excesses of colorful
>style and concocting totally phony attitudes., just as when word
>processing programs first gained the capability to handle a wide
>variety of fonts, some people produced memos that looked like
>ransom notes.

Yes, and many of the newsletters we're seeing--as many are cc:ed or
forwarded to our list--are the kissing cousins of "zines." Same faux style,
same emphasis on "flash" over substance. (Not all of them of course.)

--Tim May


Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

> I still think of "The Wall Street Journal" and "The Economist," two of my
> favorites, as being _careful_ in their reporting (careful is different from
> unbiased). But my main focus in this thread was on the _styles_, and this I
> think is more explained by faddishness.
>
> And advertising. To get "mind space," as with "shelf space," the packaging
> must entice, fool, and trick the reader.

	This might can be tied back in with Tim's other RANT about
prozac/ritalin/Haagen Daas/[insert your favorite mood altering
substance here] and ADD.  Today's kids supposedly can't concentrate on
anything for more than the duration of a music video or the first
"act" of Baywatch.  But it's all just simpler to dope them up and let
'em watch Pamela Sue jiggle than try to raise them properly.

> Yes, and many of the newsletters we're seeing--as many are cc:ed or
> forwarded to our list--are the kissing cousins of "zines." Same faux style,
> same emphasis on "flash" over substance. (Not all of them of course.)

	But media in general is becomming a meme-eat-meme world.  If
you don't entertain enough to hook the reader they won't bother with
you (and your meme never propagates).  Who cares if CSPAN is
broadcasting hearings on changes to some law that could fundamentally
change American society as we know it, there's an infomercial on for
that amazing new flameproof car wax that cures baldness and predicts
the future more accurately than Dionne Warwick.  The Sci-Fi Channel
needs to update their "Max Headroom" episodes from "20 minutes into
the future..." to only about ten (if that).

	Now where'd I leave my Zik Zak . . . :)

---
Fletch                                                     __`'/|
fletch@ain.bls.com  "Lisa, in this house we obey the       \ o.O'    ______
404 713-0414(w)      Laws of Thermodynamics!" H. Simpson   =(___)= -| Ack. |
404 315-7264(h) PGP Print: 8D8736A8FC59B2E6 8E675B341E378E43  U      ------