On ‘journalism’ - there are essentially three types.
1 bullshit –
what 99% broadly ‘mainstream’ or also much of the absurd citizen journalist operators
online echoing (poor mainstream opining) has become. see Pilger piece below.
2 rare
independent facts/evidence based attempts at more scientific truths in respect
of wars/ politics etc even science. The kind that Pilger trailblazed almost
alone via his excellent books from early 80s. Huge issue Pilger leaves out that
(no disrespect to yoof) but understanding the deeper background – vested
interests even in science for example, takes years - many years of maturity and good reading.
The average age of journalists has drastically reduced – due large media
organisation cost cutting, and its almost impossible for younger journalists to
have the depth to practice good sceptical rules. An expert from many years bbc
/ itv as reporter - a bit of a
conformist chappie as all people from that world are by default said to me a
few months ago – April 2021, only thing i watch now is AL jezeera.
3. opinion journalism. OUR area as we have no
means of going around interviewing all the bigwigs and researching world
affairs or even fully researching domestic science or ‘medical’ politics.
Clever deep wise opinion journalism. And ONLY ‘character’ keeps the watchers
watching. Not foolish but to some extent AUTHENTIC maverick. New takes on it
all. I happen to be expert. But ways of actually proving you are authentic need
to be woven in. Younger people have one good thing about their pandemic of malaise
– they can smell bullshit maybe better than any other generation before them.
Just as
trite example made up quickly, human statements need to be applied – the
problem with smartarse journos its all so clinical even your Alex Belfields, “
my girlchild is the only person alive i care about fully, and i told her years
ago i would only ever try and speak wise truths. And i told her also that if i
failed she should disown me” or to the viewer: “ you have my name, please do
critique me far and wide online if i
fail to add usefully and intelligently to
the debate..”
The journalist
distancing themselves from real life consequences is one of the major problems
of the (over ‘professionalised) age. And worse using a rantiness for effect
simply harms younger generations by getting the zeitgeist ridiculously huffy..
Indeed silly
backwards snobberies too prevail. It has been the norm for some years now for
any younger smartphone owning person to record ordinary daily conversation. I
would state to anyone if i had any even quasi public or public self promoting
role “ please always record every word i utter ... i may be doing the same also ....and hold me
to account gently on any inconsistencies...we are all in it together.... “
the one
issue with the latter being people will use things out of context and context
may be over extended encounters. But the fullest record perhaps allays that
possibility.
But this unwillingness
to accept that we live in a world where
any word we utter may be somehow recorded fails to realise one beauty of it
being it is psychologically most healthy if we realise in time every word we
utter maybe we will be assed sometime are we operating within the values system
we vocally promote. Always. (and at times we will all make mistakes so
‘punishment’ should never be extreme or final)Fait Accompli is one forgotten
key to very best peace of mind. Even if is a baddie.
IDW - myself i do not value these operators. I
have sat through many of their pieces. Very poor. Not philosophical, too
showoff and so so urban and in fact elitist and warped attention seeker class,
dressed up as folksy. Peterson perfect example. A man who as tenured senior medical qualified
adult could not manage to follow the obvious many years in fact decades common
sense that ALL psychotropic medicines do have serious side effects and will be
addictive. My generation knew that 40 years ago. And he calls his failure to
know that an ‘illness’ and seeks self pity and even worse includes his daughter
in this absurd charade. What example is that? When it is his job to be an
example.
Furthermore
the initial umbrella term of Intellectual dark web was silly in a fallacious
provocative manner and and flawed in that the great majority if one does as i
have many times the last few years asked an ordinary person “have you heard of
the IDW ...[ because a leading member says x its worth considering]..?”
ordinary people look at you as if you may be a childporn peddling terrorist.
Far too close to the ‘dark web’ they hear of on their bimbo Sky News or the
like.
HOWEVER, i
know one thing and it is all that matters.
Rubin’s band, they are - were in
their loose group, and are as individuals THE most ‘respected’ /
valued commentators of the day worldwide among the rather fey sceptical mind of
today. Almost pop stars of so called right thinking modern influencing. Remain
so.
And thus
saying “Dave Rubin said..” is about the most powerful modern day message from
God – if one has a mind. Simply should be on your cv and business plan.
Dave Rubin
says at the end...”MAKE YOUR OWN MEDIA..”
Dave Rubin: why the
'Intellectual Dark Web' split up
The
group of thinkers now known as the “Intellectual Dark Web” — Jordan Peterson,
Sam Harris, Bret and Eric Weinstein, Ben Shapiro — were convened in Dave
Rubin's garage and on his YouTube channel, The Rubin Report. And yet he has
always suffered the accusation that he wasn’t a 'real' intellectual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFC29RlH0L0&t=863s
Johan Giesecke one year on:
did Sweden succeed?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0017zNe7obo
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
19 minutes in:
PILGER
“journalism has given up”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqla0O8t1Sw
(RECORDED ON 4K IDEO DOWNLOADER 6 JUNE 2021)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.