this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
629 points (97.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

30787 readers
734 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
    • If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark
forkball
Thekingoflorda
629
If I have to fact-check the uncited claims made in news articles, doesn't that make me the journalist? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/showerthoughts
237 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Wording, the part of the truth you tell, what other truths you tell before and after.

You watch or read any big event by two papers with different views, both will probably tell the same facts but the tone, the implications, and the interpretation of the facts will be completely different.

Example:

"A young boy takes justice to a CEO after he and his family were denied medical care by their insurance company" *And now we cut to other news about people denied healthcare.

"A men struggling with mental illness after severe medical issues assassinated a fathers and loving husband who worked providing healthcare to American people". *And now we cut about news about serial killers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Far more eloquent than I ever could have put it beautiful job, thank you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I'll look at each of your examples independently (note that all that follows is my own opinion, and should be interpreted as conjecture):

“A young boy takes justice to a CEO after he and his family were denied medical care by their insurance company” *And now we cut to other news about people denied healthcare.

  • "young boy": This is opinion — what one person calls young may differ from another. Proper reporting, imo, would specify the exact age only, and cite where they know that age from. The emotionally charged language like "young", and "boy" should be omitted.
  • "justice": This is opinion — what one person calls justice may differ from another. It may even be considered verifiably false depending on one's definition of justice.
  • "after he and his family were denied medical care by their insurance company": If the reporting is only on an event that happened, this information that follows is irrelevant and only serves to emotionally charge one's interpretation — it is not good faith journalism.

A men [sic] struggling with mental illness after severe medical issues assassinated a fathers [sic] and loving husband who worked providing healthcare to American people”.

  • "A [man]": Whether someone is a "man" is a matter of opinion. I'm not aware of a hard definition. It's especially not used with an exact definition in colloquial speech. It should be omitted and replaced with the age of the individual with a source citing how that age is known.
  • "struggling with mental illness": If the reporting is only on the event that happened (ie the killing of the CEO), this information is unnecessary and only serves to emotionally charge the reporting.
  • "severe medical issues": Severity is a matter of opinion. This is emotionally charged. It can be removed for the same reason as "struggling with mental illness".
  • "assassinated": This is pure conjecture and relies on a source ­— it may not be known to be an actual assassination (assuming that assassination is interpreted as a hired hit on someone).
  • "a fathers [sic] and loving husband who worked providing healthcare to American people": Emotionally charged and can be removed if the reporting is specifically only on the event.

Both are, by definition ^[1]^, not journalism (regardless of the position they are taking), as they are mixing opinions with facts, and are attempting to interpret them, as was shown above.

References

  1. "journalism". Merriam-Webster. Accessed: 2024-12-12T01:34Z. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism.
    • §2.b.

      writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation