• MudMan
    link
    fedilink
    12 days ago

    I’m assuming you’re in a microblogging flavor of federation and that’s why this is broken down into a bunch of posts?

    Yes, I’m referring to journalism.

    • KalciferOP
      link
      fedilink
      121 hours ago

      Yes, I’m referring to journalism.

      Okay, well I don’t exactly follow the relevance of your claim that journalism can be practiced full-time. I also don’t exactly follow the usage of your language “supposed to”. Imo, one needn’t be a full-time journalist to practice journalism.

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        119 hours ago

        You can do journalism without working as a journalist, but there is a lot of work involved in doing good journalism, which I presume would be the goal.

        If you think the workload is trivial, consider the posibility you may not have a full view of everything that is involved. I’m saying everybody can and should have enough knowledge to sus out whether a piece of info they see online or in a news outlet is incorrect, misleading or opinionated, but it’s not reasonable, efficient or practical to expect everybody to access their news like a professional journalist does.

        • KalciferOP
          link
          fedilink
          15 hours ago

          […] everybody can and should have enough knowledge to sus out whether a piece of info they see online or in a news outlet is incorrect, misleading or opinionated […]

          I agree.

        • KalciferOP
          link
          fedilink
          15 hours ago

          […] it’s not reasonable, efficient or practical to expect everybody to access their news like a professional journalist does.

          I agree, but I don’t think that that’s a valid argument in defense of a journalist not citing their claims.

        • KalciferOP
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          You can do journalism without working as a journalist […]

          Err, could you clarify this? By definition doesn’t the action of doing journalism make one a journalist? For example, Merriam-Webster defines the noun “journalist” as “a person engaged in journalism” [1]. This would follow logically [2]: If one is engaged in journalism, then they are a journalist; one is engaged in journalism; therefore, they are a journalist.

          References
          1. “journalist”. Merriam-Webster. Accessed: 2024-12-12T00:10Z. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalist.

          2. “List of valid argument forms”. Wikipedia. Published: 2024-06-28T20:12Z. Accessed: 2024-12-12T00:11Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_argument_forms#Modus_ponens.
            • §“Valid propositional forms”. §“Modus ponens”.

              If A, then B

              A

              Therefore B

        • KalciferOP
          link
          fedilink
          15 hours ago

          […] If you think the workload is trivial […]

          I think you might be misunderstanding me — I’m not of the opinion that the workload for journalism is trivial. All I’m saying is that I don’t think it’s necessary to work full-time as a journalist (ie in a career capacity) to do the work of a journalist. I think there may be a miscommunication of definitions for things like “journalism”, “full-time”.

    • KalciferOP
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I’m assuming you’re in a microblogging flavor of federation and that’s why this is broken down into a bunch of posts?

      No, I’m not on a microblogging platform. I personally prefer to post atomic comments. I believe that threads should be restricted in scope so that they are clearer and easier to follow. I think that it also helps prevent miscommunications.