Matthew KeysIf you could tell a journalist something, what would you tell them? #Journalism #Media
Kyle Schwerin@matthewkeys Don't "both sides" everything because you're afraid of offending someone. Morally-reprehensible people and autocrats do not deserve a platform or respect. Highlight them as such. Don't public their words and opinions because you think it's needed to get "both sides" of the issue.
@KleShreen I don't know that the "both sides" thing is actually what's happening in commercial journalism anymore.
I think when someone unsavory is given an opportunity to speak, it's for one of two reasons:
1.) To preserve the record, which is actually really important (this often is not the reason, though), or
2.) Because people will click/watch/read, and that's good for business (uh, this happens more often...).
@KleShreen I'm reminded of what former CBS President Leslie Moonves said a few years ago, when Donald Trump was running for president...
He said, "Donald's place in this election is a good thing...it may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS."
In other words, Trump's chaos was good business for CBS News, because it meant higher ratings, and, thus, higher ad revenue.
The money outweighed the potential, and then, actual, harm.
@KleShreen And that's why people distrust journalists. That's why Mastodon instances are blocking the journa.host server that @adamdavidson is (poorly) running.
It's not abount individual journalists. Most individual journalists are well-meaning, have good intentions, and make a good faith effort to tell an honest story.
But the institution of journalism, especially commercial journalism, does not prioritize those same things. Money (ratings, which is an avenue to money) takes priority.