Innumerate Reporters?

[DTEJD1997]

Hey all:

 

Has anyone else noticed that there has been an increasing amount of innumerate reporters over the years?

 

Not that reporters are the sharpest cue balls in the drawer to begin with...but they wonder why the American public is angry and distrustful.  I would submit that this is part of the reason.

 

For example, over breakfast this AM, I was perusing the website "Business Insider" and was reading that the new Ipad pro has "graphics performance is 1,000 times faster."  Really?  That is quite an accomplishment.  Something that would take an hour to render, now takes 3.6 seconds?  Sign me up!

 

I've also noticed that a lot of on air announcers get confused/mixed up with millions, billions, and trillions.

 

We all make mistakes...but with journalists, it is their job.  I also would give just a bit of leeway to on air people...but the print journalists?  Don't they have editors that check stuff before publication?

 

Heck, if these guys get confused/mixed up about numbers, what else are they confused/wrong with?

[gfp]

It was Apple's marketing slide from the actual event...

 

Context is key of course - they were discussing how far the iPad has come since the original iPad, 8.5 years ago

[Gregmal]

In all fairness, they must be pretty creative to keep finding ways to get clicks and views.

 

You'd think after a while people would get tired of it, but a lot of the networks know there is an insatiable desire from liberals for a lot of this. Like Jim Acosta for instance... let's see, how many times do we need to see the well rehearsed posturing, the grandstanding, and then predictably, without fail, 100% of the time, some anti-Trump, "gotcha" type of question or comment?

 

That and the sound bites with no other purpose than to grab headlines. I was watching The Circus on Showtime and one of the episodes was showing the liberal mob following around Jeff Flake trying to persuade him to drop Kavanaugh. Some whackadoo granola eater runs up to him repetitiously pouting "but what do I tell my granddaughter?", "does she not matter?" and it's like "what the f*ck does any of this have to do with your grand daughter? you moron"... Or the elevator screamers, ""Tell me I don't matter!!!". Uhm.... Whatever issues you may or may not have had with sexual assault have nothing to do with this.... Crucifying a man without due process or even any legitimate evidence of ANYTHING isn't going to solve whatever mental issues you may or may not have from allegedly being assaults. But hey, all these sound bites get views and clicks and followers, so why not?

 

My point, in relation to numbers I guess, is that they have no desire to be accurate, or get it right. They're careless on purpose...

[DooDiligence]

For a while now, I've noticed quite a few of them mispronouncing words which have pretty common & obvious pronunciations.

 

I used to think that it was designed to elicit critical responses from listeners & that the producers had some elaborate metric they were measuring.

 

Now I think we're simply approaching Idiocracy.

[Spekulatius]

The struggle is real:

[DTEJD1997]

hey all:

 

One could say this is perhaps a political issue...but I am not so sure.

 

Of course, most of the media in the USA is for the "left" and very liberal.  Not all media is, and some is more biased than others.  However, if they are not understanding, OR mis-reporting things, how does this possibly advance their agenda?  Whatever that agenda is (right or left)?

 

All it does is raise suspicion and breed contempt...eventually they will also lose their place in society.  This is arguably well under way.

 

I just don't get it.

 

 

[DooDiligence]

For the past few months, I've been occasionally watching old episodes of Rowan & Martin's "Laugh In" on Amazon Prime.

 

They lampoon the same issues which cause such a stir today (no mention of mass shootings unless you consider Vietnam.)

 

They crack on health care, war (Vietnam), corrupt politicians (Nixon AND Agnew), taxes, etc (the same junk as now, but with different characters.)

 

The big difference today is the consolidation of media ownership & cross ownership of the different media types.

 

---

 

Big brother (government) and his loud, ever present, pervy old uncle (media owners.)

 

"Look that up in your Funk and Wagnalls!"

 

---

 

I haven't watched the news since the hurricane came through & haven't been on Twitter since then either.

 

I'm simply going about my business & paying attention to what's within my circle of influence (also paying attn to COBF bc it is sooo helpful.)

 

I plan on hitting a bit of national news & glancing in on Twitter for the 1st 7 days of each month & then I'll stick my head in the sand again until the next month (from now until?)

 

I'm placing my faith in those stalwart individuals like Jake Tapper, and others within the media & politics, who are willing to ferret out the truth & do battle with douchebags.

 

---

 

I couldn't be happier & have never been more busy & effective.

[michaelj]

It's not just journalists, but any profession that draws primarily on liberal arts/humanities majors. It's unfortunate because a lot of people don't see math as directly relevant to their job, so they use that as an excuse not to make an effort while defining themselves in such a way: "I'm not a numbers guy, that's someone else's job..." etc.  However I would venture to say that Americans aren't going to lose faith in journalism just because some of them aren't very good at math.  Most people aren't.

[LC]

It's not just journalists, but any profession that draws primarily on liberal arts/humanities majors. It's unfortunate because a lot of people don't see math as directly relevant to their job, so they use that as an excuse not to make an effort while defining themselves in such a way: "I'm not a numbers guy, that's someone else's job..." etc.  However I would venture to say that Americans aren't going to lose faith in journalism just because some of them aren't very good at math.  Most people aren't.

Got any proof?

[rb]

Well there's a couple of things. For one they're journalists, so they're job is more to report rather than do math.

 

Then there are different levels of media organizations. For a lot of them to be called a media organization is a real stretch. Then there are others which are just bast. Then you have a few good ones and everything on the spectrum in between. You mentioned Business Insider. That is a churn shop. They just put out as many articles as they can. They pay their writers like crap. What kind of excellence do you expect from a place like that? When they do happen to have some competent people they bolt for greened pastures when they become available - see Joe Weisenthal. But I doubt that you would have the same complaints against say the Financial Times.

[DooDiligence]

It's not just journalists, but any profession that draws primarily on liberal arts/humanities majors. It's unfortunate because a lot of people don't see math as directly relevant to their job, so they use that as an excuse not to make an effort while defining themselves in such a way: "I'm not a numbers guy, that's someone else's job..." etc.  However I would venture to say that Americans aren't going to lose faith in journalism just because some of them aren't very good at math.  Most people aren't.

 

I have a 93 in math for my midterm & expect to raise that before the end of the semester.

 

We just covered factoring of polynomials, east easy peasy.

(edit: I need to pay more attention in spelling class.)

 

Try extracting cadences & non-harmonic tones from melodic snippets, especially when the key is given but there are modal changes within the piece & then talk about liberal arts majors who don't understand the world.

[DooDiligence]

Well there's a couple of things. For one they're journalists, so they're job is more to report rather than do math.

 

Then there are different levels of media organizations. For a lot of them to be called a media organization is a real stretch. Then there are others which are just bast. Then you have a few good ones and everything on the spectrum in between. You mentioned Business Insider. That is a churn shop. They just put out as many articles as they can. They pay their writers like crap. What kind of excellence do you expect from a place like that? When they do happen to have some competent people they bolt for greened pastures when they become available - see Joe Weisenthal. But I doubt that you would have the same complaints against say the Financial Times.

 

Exactly.

 

The problem is the concentration of ownership & subsequent segmenting of news for individual demographics.

 

Playbook:

 

Explain the world to your audience within their own limited frame of reference.

Hammer your explanations repeatedly even if they contain half truths & fuzzy logic.

 

Find a segment of the population for your audience to hate (bonus points if you can make them love that same segment later.)

 

Relentlessly pander to the fears & biases you've instilled in your audience.

 

Excite their emotions by pushing the buttons you've created (bonus points if you can excite misogynists with sexy female personalititties & they don't stop hating women.)

 

Don't be afraid to change your audiences fears & biases, they'll never notice.

Above all, remember, the truth is overrated, ratings are EVERYTHING.

[michaelj]

It's not just journalists, but any profession that draws primarily on liberal arts/humanities majors. It's unfortunate because a lot of people don't see math as directly relevant to their job, so they use that as an excuse not to make an effort while defining themselves in such a way: "I'm not a numbers guy, that's someone else's job..." etc.  However I would venture to say that Americans aren't going to lose faith in journalism just because some of them aren't very good at math.  Most people aren't.

 

I have a 93 in math for my midterm & expect to raise that before the end of the semester.

 

We just covered factoring of polynomials, east peasy.

 

Try extracting cadences & non-harmonic tones from melodic snippets, especially when the key is given but there are modal changes within the piece & then talk about liberal arts majors who don't understand the world.

 

I said nothing about liberal arts majors not understanding the world.  I am one myself and would urge my children to as well.  I was just pointing out the phenomena of people who think math isn't relevant to them, and therefore make little effort to use it.

[tengen]

I tend to agree with Aldous Huxley: “Science is not enough, religion is not enough, art is not enough, politics and economics is not enough, nor is love, nor is duty, nor is action however disinterested, nor, however sublime, is contemplation. Nothing short of everything will really do.”

 

[DooDiligence]

It's not just journalists, but any profession that draws primarily on liberal arts/humanities majors. It's unfortunate because a lot of people don't see math as directly relevant to their job, so they use that as an excuse not to make an effort while defining themselves in such a way: "I'm not a numbers guy, that's someone else's job..." etc.  However I would venture to say that Americans aren't going to lose faith in journalism just because some of them aren't very good at math.  Most people aren't.

 

I have a 93 in math for my midterm & expect to raise that before the end of the semester.

 

We just covered factoring of polynomials, east peasy.

 

Try extracting cadences & non-harmonic tones from melodic snippets, especially when the key is given but there are modal changes within the piece & then talk about liberal arts majors who don't understand the world.

 

I said nothing about liberal arts majors not understanding the world.  I am one myself and would urge my children to as well.  I was just pointing out the phenomena of people who think math isn't relevant to them, and therefore make little effort to use it.

 

Sorry, I read your post wrongly & took offense.

 

I think that certain media outlets are hiring people who are relatable to the demographic they're trying to reach.

 

Also, if your reporters are inarticulate, marginally literate and more importantly, innumerate, you can get them to say whatever you want AND pay them less. (We talked about irony today in Comp 2 and I'm practicing my chops with this last statement.)