Where do you guys get your news from?

Woebot

Well-known member
whatever you think of her and the piece, it's an interesting takedown of the profession as it stands.
don't think i've ever read anything so ghastly. an extraordinary mix of righteousness and self-indulgence. the radiohead namecheck was particularly illuminating.


news=entertainment
 

luka

Well-known member
I thought it was a curious response to the article but if challenged I very much doubt woebot will Stand by it
 

Woebot

Well-known member
I thought it was a curious response to the article but if challenged I very much doubt woebot will Stand by it

strangely one doesn't have to look far to read another "curious response" (does "curious" mean "critical" or nothing very precise?)

the righteous path is often in front of one's eyes, or something

the article startled me too - rare to see someone being so honest, especially in a professional context, I think. The editor doesn't come off well, and neither does Clara. And what follows is pretty eye-opening.

Though my girlfriend was less impressed, as her father was involved in a very similar field as Borri - she's heard a lot of the bravado (disguised bravado, but bravado nonetheless) too often before.

but to take just one single example from the piece to explain why i thought "righteous" was apposite:

original article said:
there is the Japanese tourist who is on the frontlines, because he says he needs two weeks of “thrills”; the Swedish law-school graduate who came to collect evidence of war crimes;

why is this lady any different from these "nuts". she implies she is.

looking forward to you trolling me again sometime soon luke. thanks.
 
Last edited:

griftert

Well-known member
Yeh I think that's a good point. I didn't think it was obvious that she was any different. I guess I'm just more willing to give nutcases some sort of moral legitimacy I guess. There sounds like the makings of an interesting novel there though.
 

luka

Well-known member
Im not trolling Matthew.
I thought your response was curious partly for its substance but also because it was so wildly over the top and intemperate.
I doubted you would stand by it as it seemed to be an spontaneous expression of some other deeper, private emotion rather than a considered response to the article itself.
Perhaps that was wrong and you were feeling happy and contented at the time you made the comment and just really genuinely hated that woman
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
I think it's clear that anyone reporting from a war zone is not doing it totally out of altruism, and that there is a lot else going on. But should they be pilloried for this, given that 'lot else going on' is likely often be the (doomed, I'd say) attempt to resolve personal trauma in some way. And if they're at least trying to explain what's happening to a wider audience, rather than going for thrills and not producing anything useful. Or is what they produce always going to be prejudicial and myopic anyways?

I'm just reading the Patrick Cockburn book on ISIS and other Sunni radicalism - given that I know v little about Syria (and that so much news from the country seems to have been quickly contradicted by other sources, and then overwritten by a new conventional wisdom), I am finding it interesting. But again, quite a few asides about the times he was almost killed, doing things that it's not clear were absolutely necessary.

@trza - http://www.cjr.org/feature/womans_work.php
 
Last edited:
Top