And, just, don't forget that a lot of the people who are "sticking around" went to j-school and now have a significant amount of debt. So leaving journalism isn't exactly the cleanest option for them.
Donate to your local investigative nonprofit.
So it seems like a net negative.
There literally doesn’t seem to be any substance I can respond to.
To keep things grounded, almost nobody bites the hand that feeds 'em. Whistleblowing or swimming against the stream, while being celebrated whenever it happens, is a very low minority in any profession. If your boss tells you where things are supposed to go, you might grind your teeth, and maybe bitch about it to your friends, but chances are high you will comply. Journalists are no different.
Everything you described, like I've said about 10 times now, is economically rooted. Donate to your local investigative nonprofit.
I honestly don't know any local investigative nonprofit that is not biased. There are the big conservatively led newspapers, and there are smaller left to extreme left leaning publishers that try to be a counterweight. However, to my knowledge, we dont have any publishers that are really trying to report independent from a political side or agenda.
I'm not sure that it's even actually possible to have "unbiased" reporting. You want something unattainable and it's understandable why it'd be frustrating that no such thing exists. We live in a fucked up world, m8.
There are few things that are unbiased, least of all language. Even when communicating a straight fact, the words and tone chosen to communicate it have an inherent bias. One can report with glee or hope or skepticism or anger or just about any other emotion, with positive or negative or neutral words, all of which have an inherent bias. To a person who's happy about something, a reporter's skepticism of that same thing is an unmistakable bias. The point is, that doesn't make it bad. Accuracy of reported facts seems to be a stronger indicator of the "lack of bias" that people prefer.
There is no biased reporting because there are no unbiased event descriptors. Not video, not photos, not physics papers, not even describing some stuff that happened to you firsthand.
When I felt it more (heh it's definitely not gone) it was out of a feeling of not being able to contribute, or not being able to understand things to the degree that I felt was meaningful and moral. There's so much to do to understand what's going on around us and the lack of available resources is... not great. But so much of it is just a matter of starting to look into something and see where it goes. For me, it was researching parking tickets and towing that got me started after my car was illegally towed. For you, maybe a pot hole destroyed one of your tire and nobody in your area's looked into why pot holes aren't being fixed.
Feel free to email me if you ever want to chat about this more, or if you'd like to brainstorm ways to figure things out. My email isn't hard to find.
> Journalists who said they were Republicans continued to drop from 18 percent in 2002 and 7.1 percent in 2013 to 3.4 percent in 2022. This figure is notably lower than the percentage of U.S. adults who identified with the Republican party (26 percent according to the poll mentioned earlier) in 2022. About half of all journalists (51.7 percent) said they were Independents, which is about 12 percentage points above the figure for all U.S. adults (40 percent). Overall, U.S. journalists today are much more likely to identify themselves as Independents rather than Democrats or Republicans—a pattern similar to 2013.
https://www.theamericanjournalist.org/post/american-journali...
But it's beside the point anyway: They weren't referring to the political affiliation of the people working at the newspaper, they were referring to the leanings of the people who own the newspaper.
Is Jeff Bezos a conservative?
This is a baseless conspiracy theory.
> Besides, I am not a U.S citizen, so your quoted stats are not relevant to my statement above them.
These patterns hold for every country in the Anglosphere. Canadian leftists are fond of accusing the media of being conservative, but the reality is that they are just so far into alt politics that they consider anyone remotely normal to be an extremist. Similar accusations of crypto-conservatism are levied against journalists in South America, so I have to think that is what is going on here.
There’s an easy way for us to test my theory: What region do you live in, and what specific statements were these journalists making that struck you as evil?
Well, I beg to differ. Just reading HN, accusing people of fascism has become a lot more common-place then, say, 10 years ago. Offline, I have had a lot of chats with people that share my sentiment, which I would consider rather centrist. The left has gotten so very aggressive when it comes to disagreements that they started to push anyone away to the right who isn't willing to agree with everything they currently have on their agenda.
> what specific statements were these journalists making that struck you as evil?
I deliberately wrote "vibe" because accidentally overhearing that work meeting is actually a few years ago. It would be extremely dishonest of me to conjure up an exact quote. I simply can't without making up stuff. Sure, that opens all doors to attack me for even mentioning it. And maybe thats right. However, personal experiences are always ancedotal. Still, it is all we, as individuals, have.
People are far more open about having conservative ideas today than they were 10 years ago.
> The left has gotten so very aggressive when it comes to disagreements that they started to push anyone away to the right who isn't willing to agree with everything they currently have on their agenda.
Right, but was their hegemonic power appreciably greater in 2022 than in 2015? Cancel culture peaked midway through the Trump presidency. These days you get people using their real names and faces commenting: “DEPORT BUTTON” under videos of ethnic minorities. It’s possible that journalists are just claiming to be neutral or left-leaning in the way that campus conservatives used to feel compelled to, but the more likely explanation seems to be that journalists are simply overwhelmingly centrist or left-leaning.
> However, personal experiences are always ancedotal. Still, it is all we, as individuals, have.
We have statistics, we don’t have to rely on anecdotes. You’re deferring to an anecdote and insisting that the data is wrong. It’s possible it doesn’t align with your anecdotal experience because of a selection bias on your part, or because the data doesn’t map from the Anglosphere to whatever country you are from, but the data is there.
Where is that again?
So far x/bsky seem to at least be the consistent discovery platforms for finding these folks who have split off.
Any time you read or view a piece of content, follow the money trail that got it in front of your eyeballs, ears or fingertips -- it may well be enlightening.