01-18-2017, 10:21 AM
(01-17-2017, 12:46 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:(01-17-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:(01-16-2017, 10:55 AM)SomeGuy Wrote: That was the point, it was posted in reportage, rewritten to become "analysis", and yet not moved to the commentary section where it belonged.
...
Yes, THAT is the function of the press. It's supposed to INFORM the public, not propagandize it. If you honestly think the role of the press in a free society is to tell people WHAT to think (in the "public interest", of course), than you might as well just nationalize all of it and call it "The Department of Truth".
Analysis occupies more space in a typical newspaper than straight reporting. Surprise! But let's agree that analysis is not commentary. There are few stories simple enough to be reported with no added context. Once you add context, you've added some analysis. As complex as the world is today, I don't see any alternative.
... which is hell-and-gone from the Ministry of Truth.
All I see is that you didn't bother to read the links and as such are continuing to talk out of your hat. Please, if you want to keep talking, actually read the thing, look at the side by side, and tell me how that counts as "analysis".
Rewrites are par for the course. Why is this surprising, especially under the deadline pressure that's baked into the 24/7 news cycle. The real questions: did the change also change the meaning and intent of the piece, and did real information get expunged, or was it a case of error correction?
I saw nuance and context added, but nothing expunged that was solid. By your standard, only the perfect gets reported, which is to say, nothing gets reported.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.