tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post112905483893856589..comments2024-03-26T16:03:42.608-06:00Comments on Flares into Darkness: The Critical Pressambisinistralhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03836786826294202405noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129112381651360132005-10-12T04:19:00.000-06:002005-10-12T04:19:00.000-06:00Thus they totally miss surprises that go against C...<I>Thus they totally miss surprises that go against CW. That indicate reality isn't quite what they think or, at the least, that signal changes to come.</I> <BR/><BR/>This is an excellent point: things which go against the CW <I>should</I> be among the most newsworthy --- if information content were the rule.Charlie Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14586506407851173416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129075609544285782005-10-11T18:06:00.000-06:002005-10-11T18:06:00.000-06:00If they cover the OK bombing {rick I love the splo...If they cover the OK bombing {rick I love the splodeyokie thing} then they might have to deal with the fact that a lot of Okies have said for years that there was a connection between the Federal building and jihadis.<BR/><BR/>And since the prevailing story in the media is that terrorism is all Bush's fault, this might make their narrative a little awkward.<BR/><BR/>After all why didn't all these hot shot journalist types know what was going on in a state with a population of less than Dallas, Texas?<BR/><BR/>Makes you wonder what else they are completely clueless about.<BR/><BR/>the vultures.terryehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16609746018265953069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129072330217710932005-10-11T17:12:00.000-06:002005-10-11T17:12:00.000-06:00I love 'size of the surprise' as the determinant o...I love 'size of the surprise' as the determinant of what is more newsworthy. And your examples are spot on.<BR/><BR/>When journalists speak of 'man bites dog' their definition only fits a certain class of 'surprises'--those events that are aberrant, occur once, and will never happen again.<BR/><BR/>Thus they totally miss surprises that go against CW. That indicate reality isn't quite what they think or, at the least, that signal changes to come.Sylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03069871911665125873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129064134972003442005-10-11T14:55:00.000-06:002005-10-11T14:55:00.000-06:00Sen, if news is what fits a preconceived model - t...Sen, if news is what fits a preconceived model - the need to criticize (which I agree is something of a model for them) - then the model is going to cause them problems because criticism can always backfire and they know it. So you need a model + an uncertainty factor, which actually is what you already see.<BR/><BR/>Hinrichs is a paradoxical figure for MSM. A pathetic kid blowing himself up might allow them to criticize the authorities, but just as likely it would make their own anti-authoritarian and anti-western prejudices look like what they are: an incentive to lousy thinking and pathetic kids.<BR/><BR/>The MSM are political animals, first of all in the sense that most of them take their lead from certain of their own authorities as to what is news. That entails various forms of signalling and uncertainty. So modelling political instincts and risk taking is the challenge here: it seems that presently they look at Hinrichs and say, nope, a little too dicey, could make us look bad, let's forget about this dumbass who doesn't fully know his place in the culture war and can't at least bomb successfully so as to testify to the focussed will behind the murderous resentment that is out there thanks to the evil of the burning Bush. And, of course, we don't want to inflame anti-Muslim prejudices.truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129063700922406902005-10-11T14:48:00.000-06:002005-10-11T14:48:00.000-06:00I forgot. I agree with Eric - do the full court ge...I forgot. I agree with Eric - do the full court geek fest. Write it for eigth graders though, otherwise my mind will wanRick Ballardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11082425215912372067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129063446435040712005-10-11T14:44:00.000-06:002005-10-11T14:44:00.000-06:00"Is criticism as criticism really the ideal or cen..."Is criticism as criticism really the ideal or central function of the press?"<BR/><BR/>I've been of the opinion that the central function of the press has been to provide a satisfactory return on investment to its proprietors for quite some time. That return can be measured in other than monetary terms - political power and influence come to mind. "Criticism" may simply reflect an attempt to increase the 'influence' return. An event has weight - or is news - only when it fits the critical narrative positively. A noteworthy event of neutral value is reported on a space available basis and an event with a negative critical narrative value is consigned to the oubliette. <BR/><BR/>If the proprietors worldview and basis for measurement of return can be devined, then the content of his product can be determined. The splodeyokie story will be 'news' when it can either be spun into the critical narrative or (as with Bubba's little error) other outlets with different narratives force it to the forefront.<BR/><BR/>Many positive stories are printed every day. How did you come by the information on power generation in Baghdad? They just aren't above the fold in the NYT or WaPo or the lead item on FNC.<BR/><BR/>An ideal press would be an entirely different subject.Rick Ballardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11082425215912372067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129060758494301192005-10-11T13:59:00.000-06:002005-10-11T13:59:00.000-06:00After all, the Oklahoma exploding student leaves p...<I>After all, the Oklahoma exploding student leaves plenty of room for criticism (eg, criticize homeland security). Truthfully, that one is hardest for me to explain under any model</I><BR/><BR/>That's an excellent point. I agree: my model doesn't cover this. I don't think this is explained by the being-far-from-Times-Sqare model either. After all, look at the circus they created over the JonBenet murder. Here's a guess. How about the "we're withholding this information because we don't want to believe in that reality" model?MeaninglessHotAirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11767916621253839341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129058169207938022005-10-11T13:16:00.000-06:002005-10-11T13:16:00.000-06:00Hmmm. I seem to have just set myself up to write ...Hmmm. I seem to have just set myself up to write an interesting non-technical overview of information theory.<BR/><BR/>... I think I may have a dentist's appointment that day.<BR/><BR/>MHA, I think the notion that it's "criticize the symbolic Dad" may not be quite correct. After all, the Oklahoma exploding student leaves plenty of room for criticism (eg, criticize homeland security). Truthfully, that one is hardest for me to explain under <I>any</I> model: it's surprizing, it was a close call (not enough blood?), it's what may well be a terror attack within the continental US. (On the other hand, it was apparently a success of the checkpoint and screening.) <BR/><BR/>Is it simply that it happened more than 100 miles from Times Square and 50 from the ocean, and is therefore by definition less interesting?Charlie Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14586506407851173416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129056666063823892005-10-11T12:51:00.000-06:002005-10-11T12:51:00.000-06:00I think your model is correct.I think the genesis ...I think your model is correct.<BR/><BR/>I think the genesis of this behavior is pretty straightforward to trace: it's a direct consequence of the Woodward-Bernstein coup that sent the press into permanent paroxyms of extended adolescence. "We brought down the President, man!".<BR/><BR/>It's well-known and well-documented that journalism students and journalists view "making a difference in society" as one of their essential tasks. This is defended by so-called media critic (I would say "media crony") <A HREF="http://www.buzzmachine.com/" REL="nofollow">Jeff Jarvis</A>.<BR/><BR/>The deeper question, which you touch upon, is: what does "making a difference in society" really mean? The dogma of the day, as you state, is that it means nothing more than being critical of whatever symbolic Dad we happen to have at the moment. Surely we can do better.MeaninglessHotAirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11767916621253839341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-1129055629946570002005-10-11T12:33:00.000-06:002005-10-11T12:33:00.000-06:00Do the full-court press geek fest on this. I am in...Do the full-court press geek fest on this. I am intrigued.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02521739006999750126noreply@blogger.com