"Journalists Suck," Say Journalists

The Medill School of Journalism has surveyed reporters from across the land and, surprise: They're not too happy with their profession, and especially unhappy with being criticized.

More than half of the surveyed journalists reported working with "a peer involved in fabrication, plagiarism or other deliberate misconduct," the survey stated. It added that 20% believed such wrong behavior should be punished more rigorously.
…
"Newspaper journalists say problems in television news, on Web sites and blogs, and even in tabloids and shopper publications all have a deleterious effect on the credibility of newspaper journalists," the report stated. "In addition, almost one in five say that criticism of media by politicians erodes readers' trust."

Hey, politicians have their own stuff to worry about.

Comments

[The Real Bill]

More than half of the surveyed journalists reported working with "a peer involved in fabrication, plagiarism or other deliberate misconduct," the survey stated.

It's hard enough trying to figure out what's going on in the world without journalist liars making it worse. How 'bout they leave the lying to the professionals: politicians.

[VM]

Sports or entertainment journalists: which is worse?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Here are the priorities of a mainstream journalist, by order of importance:

1) To sensationalize (to sell papers)
2) To teach (mostly leftist dogma)
3) To report the facts

And it's fun to see them sweating over the fact that the common slob has a much greater access now to information.

These dinosaurs are quicky sinking into the muck.

[The Real Bill]

Sports or entertainment journalists: which is worse?

There's a difference?

[Mr. F. Le Mur]

These dinosaurs are quicky sinking into the muck.
Same as it ever was.

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." - T. Jefferson

[Marbles]

I was working at a newspaper when the Drudge Report first came to prominence. A surprising number of my colleagues seemed to viscerally dislike the whole idea of the Drudge Report, not just Drudge himself. I would think the idea of your own website would be a reporter's dream - write what you want, when you want and not have to fill space with lame junk like comics and horoscopes.

The people who have interesting blogs and websites today are people who might have been newspaper journalists 30 or 40 years ago, but find more opportunity on the the Internet.

[Jersey McJones]

If that's what the newspaper people are saying, imagine what's going on with this "alternative media!"

JMJ

[Scott Ferguson]

I sincerely believe that MSM bias is most egregious not at the reporting level, but at the editing level -- where stories are placed and how they are played within a newspaper, magazine, or news broadcast.

Drudge is hated not for what he writes -- he writes precious little -- but for his audacious re-editing the news using other people's content. He picks and chooses articles from MSM outlet web sites and presents an entirely different view of the world. It's like taking your enemy's ammunition and shooting it back at them.

This method of "repurposing" the news is a huge innovation. Drudge deserves to be remembered in media history as a true pioneer.

[Jersey McJones]

Drudge is a lying scumbag of the lowest order and anyone who reads him is retarded by default. Brill's Content (God rest that mag) tore that little prick to pieces, calling him to task on his endless stream lies.

Drudge is a joke and his readers are stupid.

JMJ

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Scott:

You make an excellent point about placement.

Yesterday, the Washinton Post had a front-page article about a Republican congressman taking bribes, and had about a full page total dedicated to the story. Buried on page two, they allowed a brief article about a dirty Democrat congressman.

I hate Republicans, too, but the WaPo doesn't even try to hide its cheerleading for the Democratic Party.

I gag while reading the WaPo, but I have no choice. It's either that or the Moony paper.

[Murphy]

Mr. Nice Guy -- So, in the interest of transparency, what's your source for that information? 🙂

The problem today is that journalism really needs a separation of the wheat from the chaff. What it's getting instead is a brushfire.

(Hey, if I were a master of simile and metaphor, I would've gone into fiction!)

[Lurker Kurt]

...his endless stream lies.

I am puzzled by the hatred of Drudge. As Scott said, he writes very, very little.

99% of his content are links to MSM stories.

Can someone explain this to me?

[B.P.]

Some choice quotes, those. The first one: Half of all journalists work with a shyster, but only 20% advocate more punishment of them. "Lou at the city desk is a dishonest schmuck, but waddya gonna do?"

The second one is downright sociopathic: The credibility problems plaguing newspaper journalists are caused by other media outlets (shopper publications?!). "Damn the Thrifty Nickel Want Ads, they're undermining my hard work!"

[Another Lurker]

"Drudge is a lying scumbag of the lowest order and anyone who reads him is retarded by default."

I don't read the Drudge report, but his site is probably as credible as The Nation and equally as biased, just in the other direction.

I personally think it is great there are more choices out there and that there are some heavily partisan sources. It helps to figure out what everyone is thinking and their POV.

JMJ, how does your computer still work? Doesn't the foam from your mouth short it out or do you have a slobber bucket to protect it or something?

[ChicagoTom]

More than half of the surveyed journalists reported working with "a peer involved in fabrication, plagiarism or other deliberate misconduct,...

"In addition, almost one in five say that criticism of media by politicians erodes readers' trust."

Really?? Criticism by politicians is what erodes peoples trust??? Not the fact that half of those surveyed work with peers who fabricate and deliberately conduct themselves inappropriately??

Talk about being disconnected from reality.

The reason people don't trust most media, is because the media gets it wrong so often and have proven themselves to be untrustoworthy and unwilling to debunk the latest "hype" "epidemic" or "scare" -- and constantly feed the flames and sensationalize non-issues. Not to mention that many large publications refuse to do investigative reporting out of fear that whoever they might expose as doing bad things might pull advertising or a politician might refuse to give them "access".

[Ranger Rick]

JMJ, how does your computer still work? Doesn't the foam from your mouth short it out or do you have a slobber bucket to protect it or something?

Please do not feed the trolls.

[ChicagoTom]

I don't read the Drudge report, but his site is probably as credible as The Nation and equally as biased, just in the other direction.

I've never been exposed basketball, but I can tell you that a "triangle offense" is probably no good and can not produce success at any level.

Drudge is very much an embellisher and a distorter. He has a tendency of "reporting" things in a way that distorts the truth in many cases. (Not all)

Having read both the Nation and the Drudge Report I can say that, in my opinion, the Nation is a bit more trustworthy -- but far less interesting.

[Another Lurker]

ChicagoTom, as much as it pains me to say it, I probably would trust The Nation more than Drudge too. Oh god gonna vomit. But it depends on the story I guess, and I usually need to check some sources too. So it just gets too damn complicated.

The Nation has a long checkered history of apology for some of the worst butchers of the 20th century as well. I guess I convict the current staff for the sins in its history.

If someone gets a link off Drudge, it's better that they don't tell me where they got it. I am less likely to view it as credible knowing it came from there.

Sorry Ranger, I like feeding trolls.

[Marbles]

B.P., newspaper journalists think all their readers are too dumb to tell the difference between shoppers that print verbatim press releases and regular newspapers.

They tend to judge all their readers by the lowest common denominator

[Ubermensch]

It's all a tempest in a teapot anyway. We are not the sort who read, much less write for, newspapers.

[gaijin]

I think the survey is just another example of journos making themselves the story. The 4th estate has a great many reflecting pools on its grounds.

[Steven Crane]

The Drudge Report is soooooo six years ago.

[Marbles]

"The 4th estate has a great many reflecting pools on its grounds."

Good one, gaijin!

[Lurker Kurt]

I am still confused as to why Drudge is hated or called a "liar".

I just checked his site and counted 35 links to other sites include CBS News, Reuters, The New York Times, The BBC, and the Washington Post.

The only writing he has done is the 'headline' that makes up the hyperlink to the actual article.

Can anyone clear this up for me?

[Petunia Picklehead]

LK

Drudge arranges headlines in a way that makes some people (see Frothy McFroth above) feel very threatened. Outside of that, I don't know why he provokes such strong reactions.

It's just an entertaining and somewhat ridiculous tabloid to me.

[Lurker Kurt]

It's just an entertaining and somewhat ridiculous tabloid to me.

Exactly. The site is simply(mostly?) a portal to other news sites. He rarely writes anything himself.

[The Real Bill]

I don't read the Drudge report, but his site is probably as credible as The Nation and equally as biased, just in the other direction.

What a perfect example of truthiness. It's just feels true, doesn't it?

[The Real Bill]

Ed: It's s/b it!

[KyleG]

Among the many reasons I transferred into the engineering program.