When Journalism was a Thing, Part Two.

Journalists have no special training in logic or psychology, and their lack of a basic foundation shows.

  1. They believe that just because they are speaking to someone through a translator, that the translator has no vested interest in shading what is being told to the source or the journalist.
  2. They believe that just because there is window-dressing of alleged "diversity", that now there can be no accusations of racism or sexism, even if nothing has actually structurally changed, and the output remains the same.
  3. They believe that if someone who holds a belief is wrong, that designated "opposite" belief must be true by default, even if both parties have mistaken assumptions of the concept.
  4. They believe if three sources confirm a fact, it must be right by default, even if all three sources have the same underlying tainted original source who gives them their information.
  5. They believe they do not have to take in someone's mental health into their equations unless it is to dismiss what this person tells them. It must be all or none.
  6. They do not believe that they have to account for their own biases and filters when reporting.
  7. They do believe that logical fallacies can taint the information they receive or that their own logical fallacies can corrupt a product.
  8. They believe there is such a thing as a pecking order.
  9. They believe canned events, photo ops, and press releases are legitimate sources of news.

The educational system of journalism never took these dilemmas into any of their equations. The profession did the same.

You would think for a profession whose mandate was to disseminate information, they would be fanatical, innovative, empirical, and driven to use psychology, creative science, and logic to its fullest extent.

I know I did when I worked in the profession. I did all sorts of wild, but academically-based things, and yet uninspiring and confining methods were preferred by the profession, and now they have made themselves redundant in a world that has an opinion glut.

My book chronicles how this happened -- and more importantly, how an alternative model bypasses all of those old and useless sins.

Journalism never had the courage or the foresight to ask itself hard questions, and now they are paying the price.

But for the rest of us who see the problems, we do not have to pay the same price when there are alternative ways of disseminating information to a world that is suffering because it is starved for facts as it is being smothered by yet another opinion...