this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
1550 points (95.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

5856 readers
2793 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Muehe@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So the “as possible” part of the statement is really a kind of magic

Not really, it's just a reminder that every human has inherent biases and writing an entirely neutral article is thus virtually impossible. That doesn't mean journalists should go around and give into these biases without clearly stating that, and making this effort despite knowing you will fail in it is one of many indicators which can help separate serious news sources from propaganda and advertisement outlets.

Who’s not an environmentalist?

Fossil fuel companies?

It was envisioned as a “neutral” term - as factual as possible - but it said on the face of it, “environmentalists said …” meaning not us.

I don't know, I see it as media needing a term to apply to a (back then) relatively new societal movement, and environmentalist seems sufficiently descriptive and neutral to me to fulfil that role.

Are you an environmentalist? You know - one of them?

Yes. Are you? I don't see the problem here.

Maybe the journalist is one themselves. They didn't say? That's the point.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

That doesn't mean journalists should go around and give into these biases without clearly stating that

How? I mean, I agree - but I think you’re probably saying that’s what an Opinion article is for. But a news article that doesn’t state its biases is not unbiased. And I haven’t seen any news articles where bias is stated.

Who’s not an environmentalist?

Fossil fuel companies?

True, in the corporations-are-people sense, but use of the term predates that.

and environmentalist seems sufficiently descriptive and neutral to me to fulfil that role.

Are you an environmentalist? You know - one of them?

Yes. Are you? I don't see the problem here.

I don’t know what ‘an environmentalist’ is - as discussed, the news made it up. But as one, would you please define it and explain your bias, y’know, like a news reporter would?

Maybe the journalist is one themselves. They didn't say? That's the point.

Mmmnnoo, they didn’t say. You’re suggesting they would? Or that that is normally done? Again, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen that.