Will journalism ever be credible again?

Will journalism ever be credible again?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=G_4nQdCMic0
youtu.be/9Et9B_QcH0I
twitter.com/AnonBabble

When has it ever been credible?

Once they hire me I'll save journalism

youtube.com/watch?v=G_4nQdCMic0

WEW

see pic related, quoted in 1807

It was never credible.

He sounds like he will commit suicide soon.

"""Commit""" or commit?

When corporate masters decided to intercede into articles their own agenda, the news quit being informative, and started to be propaganda.

If it ever returns, i doubt it as new masters will take over. Internet news is more credible, now go back to 1999 and tell me that would be the case, and I'd have laughed at ya.

Thats why they want to censor the www

The credibility of journalism is a con invented by journalists.

No They've monetized outrage to an extent so they are going to milk it as long as they can, meantime hoping technological advancements will save them. I worked in a newspaper when it started pushing its website. The website and the print team did not get along. There is definite resentment between old and new media but you probably know all that. I think this election was their last shot at remaining relevant and they failed.

No. Not while "fake news" is being suppressed and major MSM is controlled, politically motivated, and CIA "sources" are used. Bob Woodward also compared Hillary Clinton and her foundation to Richard Nixon's watergate scandal.
youtu.be/9Et9B_QcH0I

During the civil war journalists would pose dead corpses of soldiers to make a more aesthetic photo

>There is definite resentment between old and new media but you probably know all that

Kind of, but I'd be interested to hear elaboration on that.

No! The so-called newsrooms are full of liberal uni students playing at been Journalists

This.

Woodward and Bernstein are a meme. There was a very, very brief peroid after Watergate when journalists thought their job was to investigate, but it was a short lived fad. They've always been propagandists for those in power. Always.

The only difference today is that with the internet, people don't have to trust newspapers anymore. This kills the shill.

Well, as you're aware, newspaper subscriptions are exponentially falling. The newspaper I worked for was one where you paid for a subscription. Now, the massive fucking infrastructure in the building I was at is certainly not for the website is it? All the press machines and whatnot are for a medium that is fifteen years away from extinction. But the newspaper is stubborn: It wants to keep the newspaper people around because those are the people who are tied to the legacy and blah blah blah.

The flip side is this: In my time working for the paper, digital subscriptions were up. Way up actually. Do you think the newspaper people were put on notice for under performing? Of course not. So the website now has to work twice as hard to cover the losses incurred by the print subscriptions,with half the manpower and half the space to work in. The departments were heading towards some kind of conflict. Unfortunately I was let go before I got to see more transpire.

deep redpill there

When the market demands truth desu.

Liberalism well and truly infected Journalism schools over the past few decades

we are seeing the ultimate conclusion of it: real journalists are on their way out and shithouses like HuffPo and BuzzFeed are actually getting air time

Once neutralish stations like CNN are going full cuck in the mean time

/thread

Jesus, look at the size of the necktie that (((Bernstein))) is wearing.

No, there are far too many bad faith actors working to isolate their audiences into echo chambers they've constructed. Most people don't have the time or will to make any sort of critical review of the sources available to them so they'll mostly slide into whatever reinforces their existing beliefs.

...