Is Ezra Klein gonna change the journalism game?

[Dusty Bake Activate]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-kleins-project-x-add-context-to-news/283568/

​

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Guess I should've made a thread about transsexuals or the Illuminati.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

all these authors thinking they're bigger than the story now.



Everyone wanna be Woodward and Bernstein without doing the work.

 

[Type Username Here]

all these authors thinking they're bigger than the story now.



Everyone wanna be Woodward and Bernstein without doing the work.

Plenty of writers doing the work out there. Greenwald, Klein, Wolf, Taibbi, Scahill and so on.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Breh, that article is slight depressing. People pretend so much how great life is, how smart they are, how successful they are, then you put a new subject in front of them and they turn into a 3rd grader afraid to read in the front of class. I don't even care about project X after reading that article. I care more about the problem they are trying to solve lol:

The best piece of explanatory journalism ever produced, in the estimation of press critic Jay Rosen, is the This American Life episode, "The Giant Pool of Money." It was, basically, an hour-long explainer of the subprime-mortgage crisis. "Going in to the program, I didn’t understand the mortgage mess one bit:subprime loans were ruining Wall Street firms? And I care because they are old, respected firms? That’s what I knew," Rosen wrote. "Coming out of the program, I understood the complete scam: what happened, why it happened, and why I should care. I had a good sense of the motivations and situations of players all down the line. Civic mastery was mine over a complex story, dense with technical terms, unfolding on many fronts..."

He wasn't alone. It was the most successful hour in the history of a wildly successful show. NPR launched a new show, Planet Money, in response to its success. Of course, the This American Life approach is extremely resource intensive and difficult to execute. It requires weeks of reporting, willing sources, and a talent for narrative storytelling–and on a given subject, you're competing with everyone to produce the go-to piece. Sometimes, Michael Lewis is just going to write the best explanatory story about a particular financial event, and then what?

so this is the P90x / microwaveable version of the news?

There are some stories where until I grasp the whole I am unable to make sense of any part. Not only am I not a customer for news reports prior to that moment, but the very frequency of the updates alienates me from the providers of those updates because the news stream is adding daily to my feeling of being ill-informed, overwhelmed, out of the loop. I respond with indifference, even though I’ve picked up a blinking red light from the news system’s repeated placement of “subprime” items in front of me.

Respond with indifference? frequency of updates alienates you? feeling overwhelmed? You're a fukkn adult. Man up and stop bytching. Stop absorbing "breaking news" updates and go do the research away from those distractions. Duh.

I suspect a lot of Americans are feeling this way about the NSA surveillance story right now: overwhelmed, out of the loop, under-informed, not quite sure how to catch up, and disinclined to follow the daily stream of newspaper reporting as a result. Would Project X aim to start with a full explainer? Or explain each news cycle's stories in context as they trickle out? Will it vary depending on the story? If so, will Project X be better at one mode or the other? What will it train its readers to expect?

Let's be real, if the reader CARES about a story, they'll ACTIVELY SEEK out the basic fukkn knowledge through their own research. Confusion comes from misinformation, and if Project X is just simply a FAQ type of site, then everybody is gonna slam it for having a liberal bias and being too NPRish.

All I'm reading from this article is, "Adults lack basic reading comprehension skills. You know, those test we force kids to take every 2 years of their life starting from 4th grade. You know, ending with that big ass test that gets you into a top college."

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

Respond with indifference? frequency of updates alienates you? feeling overwhelmed? You're a fukkn adult. Man up and stop bytching. Stop absorbing "breaking news" updates and go do the research away from those distractions. Duh.

Let's be real, if the reader CARES about a story, they'll ACTIVELY SEEK out the basic fukkn knowledge through their own research. Confusion comes from misinformation, and if Project X is just simply a FAQ type of site, then everybody is gonna slam it for having a liberal bias and being too NPRish.

All I'm reading from this article is, "Adults lack basic reading comprehension skills. You know, those test we force kids to take every 2 years of their life starting from 4th grade. You know, ending with that big ass test that gets you into a top college."

I agree with you on the fact that having a database with context is a sketchy idea. Overtime, we will simply have to treat each agency's "almanac" as a sort of primary account of history coming from an organization. But I see no issue with this as long as there are plenty of competing databases. I don't agree with you on the way you're looking at potential consumers of this though; you are downplaying how hard it can be to attain straight timelines and background and context for things. You're emphasizing depth of knowledge, but most people aren't looking for that nor should they per se. Being informed isn't easy. It takes significant time the way things are now, and if we can streamline that process...

 

[tru_m.a.c]

I agree with you on the fact that having a database with context is a sketchy idea. Overtime, we will simply have to treat each agency's "almanac" as a sort of primary account of history coming from an organization. But I see no issue with this as long as there are plenty of competing databases. I don't agree with you on the way you're looking at potential consumers of this though; you are downplaying how hard it can be to attain straight timelines and background and context for things. You're emphasizing depth of knowledge, but most people aren't looking for that nor should they per se. Being informed isn't easy. It takes significant time the way things are now, and if we can streamline that process...

But what can't this be applied to in life?

Why "shouldn't" you have a depth of knowledge about a particular subject matter. Everything comes back full circle. Learning about the economy in 2008 helps you in 2016. You don't start reading about the issues in 2016 in order to be informed in 2016. I'm not saying you have to have a PHD. But put forth some type of effort. Stop waiting for breaking news to go down to be informed, then maybe you won't feel rushed.

Let's be real. Again. Most people DO NOT CARE. It has nothing to do with making shyt easy. It's like going to the gym. It's like going to church. Muhfukkas will NOT do any of those activities until they're personally affected (i.e need to fit a wedding dress/ashamed to be seen in a bathing suit/death in the family etc).

So the article brings up the sub prime mortgages. I bet you every muhfukkn personal who lost their house started getting informed. And those that didn't, did so of their own choosing. What if the article was using a topic like the mass incarceration of blacks or the war on drugs. You'd probably have a different emotional response right? Our acceptance of lazy, ignorant and indifferent people is ridiculous. And we always accept it when we think we're talking about "non controversial" topics.

If people aren't forced to defend their lazy, ignorant and indifferent behavior, then how can we expect to live amongst a truly educated populace?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

But what can't this be applied to in life?

Why "shouldn't" you have a depth of knowledge about a particular subject matter. Everything comes back full circle. Learning about the economy in 2008 helps you in 2016. You don't start reading about the issues in 2016 in order to be informed in 2016. I'm not saying you have to have a PHD. But put forth some type of effort. Stop waiting for breaking news to go down to be informed, then maybe you won't feel rushed.

Let's be real. Again. Most people DO NOT CARE. It has nothing to do with making shyt easy. It's like going to the gym. It's like going to church. Muhfukkas will NOT do any of those activities until they're personally affected (i.e need to fit a wedding dress/ashamed to be seen in a bathing suit/death in the family etc).

So the article brings up the sub prime mortgages. I bet you every muhfukkn personal who lost their house started getting informed. And those that didn't, did so of their own choosing. What if the article was using a topic like the mass incarceration of blacks or the war on drugs. You'd probably have a different emotional response right? Our acceptance of lazy, ignorant and indifferent people is ridiculous. And we always accept it when we think we're talking about "non controversial" topics.

If people aren't forced to defend their lazy, ignorant and indifferent behavior, then how can we expect to live amongst a truly educated populace?

I agree with you on the fact that having a database with context is a sketchy idea. Overtime, we will simply have to treat each agency's "almanac" as a sort of primary account of history coming from an organization. But I see no issue with this as long as there are plenty of competing databases. I don't agree with you on the way you're looking at potential consumers of this though; you are downplaying how hard it can be to attain straight timelines and background and context for things. You're emphasizing depth of knowledge, but most people aren't looking for that nor should they per se. Being informed isn't easy. It takes significant time the way things are now, and if we can streamline that process...

TL;DR: Look at the Ukraine thread. You got people who seem like they've just been updated on some atrocities the USA has been apart of without context of how geopolitics works.

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

TL;DR: Look at the Ukraine thread. You got people who seem like they've just been updated on some atrocities the USA has been apart of without context of how geopolitics works.

But what can't this be applied to in life?

Why "shouldn't" you have a depth of knowledge about a particular subject matter. Everything comes back full circle. Learning about the economy in 2008 helps you in 2016. You don't start reading about the issues in 2016 in order to be informed in 2016. I'm not saying you have to have a PHD. But put forth some type of effort. Stop waiting for breaking news to go down to be informed, then maybe you won't feel rushed.

Let's be real. Again. Most people DO NOT CARE. It has nothing to do with making shyt easy. It's like going to the gym. It's like going to church. Muhfukkas will NOT do any of those activities until they're personally affected (i.e need to fit a wedding dress/ashamed to be seen in a bathing suit/death in the family etc).

So the article brings up the sub prime mortgages. I bet you every muhfukkn personal who lost their house started getting informed. And those that didn't, did so of their own choosing. What if the article was using a topic like the mass incarceration of blacks or the war on drugs. You'd probably have a different emotional response right? Our acceptance of lazy, ignorant and indifferent people is ridiculous. And we always accept it when we think we're talking about "non controversial" topics.

If people aren't forced to defend their lazy, ignorant and indifferent behavior, then how can we expect to live amongst a truly educated populace?

Honestly, I don't expect people to be educated that much on individual subjects that much. It's nigh impossible to expect people to dedicate the amount of time and effort people like us put into being informed, just speaking realistically. I'd rather have people be versed in reading comprehension, logic, and learn to use the scientific method and context properly... IMO the biggest issue in journalism today, both in writing and consumption, is sensationalism and a great deal of that stems from people lacking proper critical thinking skills..

I don't get angry if people are uninformed. I get angry if people claim to be informed but spout out bullshyt.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Honestly, I don't expect people to be educated that much on individual subjects that much. It's nigh impossible to expect people to dedicate the amount of time and effort people like us put into being informed, just speaking realistically. I'd rather have people be versed in reading comprehension, logic, and learn to use the scientific method and context properly... IMO the biggest issue in journalism today, both in writing and consumption, is sensationalism and a great deal of that stems from people lacking proper critical thinking skills..

I don't get angry if people are uninformed. I get angry if people claim to be informed but spout out bullshyt.

Right.

Don't let me see Ezra touch a science article...he'd probably butcher it, then retitle it with some eye popping headline meant to only serve as click-bait.

I agree with your last point though. Its those who claim to be educated/informed that expose themselves.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Honestly, I don't expect people to be educated that much on individual subjects that much. It's nigh impossible to expect people to dedicate the amount of time and effort people like us put into being informed, just speaking realistically. I'd rather have people be versed in reading comprehension, logic, and learn to use the scientific method and context properly... IMO the biggest issue in journalism today, both in writing and consumption, is sensationalism and a great deal of that stems from people lacking proper critical thinking skills..

I don't get angry if people are uninformed. I get angry if people claim to be informed but spout out bullshyt.

But you only know its bullshyt cause you're informed. The other 9/10ths of the population thinks they're speaking that real.

But I understand how you can be informed without putting in time and effort. How is that possible? I feel like people take the south park underwear gnome approach to civic duty.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Honestly, I don't expect people to be educated that much on individual subjects that much. It's nigh impossible to expect people to dedicate the amount of time and effort people like us put into being informed, just speaking realistically. I'd rather have people be versed in reading comprehension, logic, and learn to use the scientific method and context properly... IMO the biggest issue in journalism today, both in writing and consumption, is sensationalism and a great deal of that stems from people lacking proper critical thinking skills..

I don't get angry if people are uninformed. I get angry if people claim to be informed but spout out bullshyt.

I agree with this. People are only "lazy, ignorant, uninformed," etc. to the extent that they are compared to a smaller group of people who are less "lazy, ignorant, uninformed," etc. I'm lazy, ignorant, and uninformed compared to Maria Vos Savant.

How information is offered to people affects the nature of its consumption significantly. Television news is mostly sensationalized garbage or narrow-lensed, authority tested and approved narratives while often information and perspectives crucial to average people are shunned.

Ezra Klein does have a knack for simplifying wonkish material without bleeding it of pertinent info. If he and his people are able to create a new approach for effective, strong journalism that reaches people I'm all for it.

But what can't this be applied to in life?

Why "shouldn't" you have a depth of knowledge about a particular subject matter. Everything comes back full circle. Learning about the economy in 2008 helps you in 2016. You don't start reading about the issues in 2016 in order to be informed in 2016. I'm not saying you have to have a PHD. But put forth some type of effort. Stop waiting for breaking news to go down to be informed, then maybe you won't feel rushed.

Let's be real. Again. Most people DO NOT CARE. It has nothing to do with making shyt easy. It's like going to the gym. It's like going to church. Muhfukkas will NOT do any of those activities until they're personally affected (i.e need to fit a wedding dress/ashamed to be seen in a bathing suit/death in the family etc).

So the article brings up the sub prime mortgages. I bet you every muhfukkn personal who lost their house started getting informed. And those that didn't, did so of their own choosing. What if the article was using a topic like the mass incarceration of blacks or the war on drugs. You'd probably have a different emotional response right? Our acceptance of lazy, ignorant and indifferent people is ridiculous. And we always accept it when we think we're talking about "non controversial" topics.

If people aren't forced to defend their lazy, ignorant and indifferent behavior, then how can we expect to live amongst a truly educated populace?

What are you talking about here? How would people be "forced to defend their lazy, ignorant, or indifferent behavior"? Who's going to force them to defend anything? You? I'm failing to see your point here other than you think a lot of people are dumb. Whether people are ignorant or not, what is wrong with experimenting with ways to make good journalism accessible to people?

 

[tru_m.a.c]

What are you talking about here? How would people be "forced to defend their lazy, ignorant, or indifferent behavior"? Who's going to force them to defend anything?

Usually raising the standard of credible reporting and debating does this. I mean its 2014 and they just thought it was a good idea to start fact checking Presidential candidates after debates. Go figure.

I'm failing to see your point here other than you think a lot of people are dumb. Whether people are ignorant or not, what is wrong with experimenting with ways to make good journalism accessible to people?

Because the problem was never about good journalism not being accessible…..

Was "This American Life" cancelled because it wasn't good? Or was it cancelled because nobody watched it?