“I think what you’re reacting to is that, at the moment, Biden is an unpopular president seeking a second term while Trump is a popular figure inside his party who is winning primary races. I wouldn’t necessarily compare the two.”

Credit to @JoshuaHolland

  • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah, I mostly agree. I wasn’t trying to give the guy a free pass – just saying that really the fault lies with whoever gave him the job in the first place or told him that’s an ok way for a journalist to behave.

    But yes, the way he describes looking at political coverage is gross journalistic malpractice and people should be telling him that (or giving him a different role in society if he really insists that how he’s doing it is the way.)

    • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      The problem here is with his editor. They shouldn’t let that kind of latent bias slip through.

      • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The editorial job has likely shifted, as so many other things, from being the best and holding up a moral code intrinsic to the position, to making money for the shareholders.

        The Jack Welch style of enshitification is getting stronger everyday.

    • OpenStars@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I mean, we do hold leadership to a different, higher standard, that much is true. But is this man not the foremost world-class expert authority aka leader of his own life at least? And if not him, irt to that super narrow niche, then who else would be considered the leader of his own life?

      Imagine if you will a scenario of a Doctor on television, let us call him Oz, who gives patently false advice that literally gets people actually killed. It is not okay for the TV station to air whatever film was handed to them, but how does that absolve the responsibility of this Doctor Oz from his own measure of responsibility, one may even say culpability (or perhaps criminal liability?) in this whole affair?

      Again, there is more than one way to be incorrect, and by extension they both were partners in this crime against journalistic integrity.