I'm journalist student, who is making an essay about foreign media in terms of ethics and culture, and I chose Spain for that. Can you please help me? What are special traits for your news channels, papers, maybe Internet portals? Which code of ethics do spanish journalists have, and what problems do your media have right now? Thank you.
P. S. Love your country, hope to visit it again in nearest future
They have dug the main news - that of the letter to PM by opposition parties- to a lower corner of their website and have given prominence to an unheard of foundation CEO's reply on top.
At least one would expect them to get comments from PMO on the letter and publish it as news. No, they just found a guy to respond to a letter that is not even remotely addressed to him or his 'foundation'! This is beyond absurdity.
Guilt by association at its finest. This display of Journalism Ethics is courtesy of New York Times. Let's look at the article, shall we?
After a brief introduction to SSC, it doesn't take long for the author to show his true face:
> The voices also included white supremacists and neo-fascists. The only people who struggled to be heard, Dr. Friedman said, were “social justice warriors.” They were considered a threat to one of the core beliefs driving the discussion: free speech.
See how in the same paragraph the author throws around two common boogiemen, and then tries to quickly link those to his real issue issue: Free Speech. Let's keep going.
> many in the tech industry saw the attitudes fostered on Slate Star Codex as a better way forward. They deeply distrusted the mainstream media and generally preferred discussion to take place on their own terms, without scrutiny from the outside world.
Again. The issue here is the "lack of scrutiny from the outside world". God forbid the masses are exchanging ideas without control of the elites, else they might be exposed to naughty opinions:
> The ideas they exchanged were often controversial — connected to gender, race and inherent ability, for example — and voices who might push back were kept at bay.
And hell, God forbid a psychiatrist discuss his ideas on gender, race, and inherent ability, for that matter.
The article goes downhill from here, and I don't intend to comment on it entirely. Let's jump forward to where my main issue with it lies:
> In one post, he aligned himself with Charles Murray, who proposed a link between race and I.Q. in “The Bell Curve.” In another, he pointed out that Mr. Murray believes Black people “are genetically less intelligent than white people.” >
The language used here is the main deal. SSC apparently "aligned himself", with someone who proposed that there's a link between race and IQ. It even links the actual article where that happened.
If you take the time to read the article - which I bet the author here is hoping his readers don't do, considering how verbose SSC tends to be - this is how SSC addressed Charles Murray:
*"The only public figure I can think of in the southeast quadrant with me is Charles Murray. Neither he nor I would dare reduce all class differences to heredity, and he in particular has some v
... keep reading on reddit ➡
