To be honest, I don’t know what the “right” reason for a news story is, but it can be hard to ignore what’s at the top of the list all around us. I’ve heard a lot of stories that are, quote-unquote, “right”, but I can’t quite put my finger on what they are.
The main reason for a news story is that we can’t go back and re-read the entire interview; it’s just the fact that it went wrong that we missed the main points.
Thats right. This is a story about the death of a man who was killed by a man who was killed by a man who was killed by the police. A story about the death of a man who was killed by a man who was killed by the police. A story about a man who was killed by a man who was killed by a man who was killed by the police.
Now, lets be honest, we all have a few of these. But when it comes to news articles, the biggest problem is the main point. If you read enough of them and think they are actually important you are likely to get pulled into the next one. It’s like a game of “Where’s Waldo?”. The first one just takes you out of the zone and makes you think you already know the answer.
The story was about a man who was murdered by a man who was murdered by a man. A little too convenient. I like to think that it is due to the fact that in the news articles on the subject of crime, the main focus is not on the actual perpetrator but on the victim. This is a common technique in the news industry to make a point about a story, but at the end of the day it is the story itself that is of the most importance.
What you’ve probably noticed is that we don’t give our readers enough information about the stories we cover. In other words, it comes down to logical fallacies. As a rule, if you can’t explain it to someone, you probably haven’t done your job as an investigative journalist. This is especially true when it comes to the news industry, where the goal is to present the news as though we are making it up ourselves.
In the current news cycle, it seems as though many news sources are attempting to be more than just a reporting outlet. They’ve become “reporting engines”. They are, for example, attempting to create a “data journalism” culture. But even if you want to do this, you need to be wary about the biases that are created when you do. If you have a bias, you can make it public.
The reason for this is likely beyond the scope of this book. But if you believe that the news is an art, then there are some things you can do to make the news more accurate. For example, you can get a sense of where the story is going. You can look for stories that have been edited and made as inaccurate as you want. You can check your news sources, and you can look at your news sources for any news that you believe to be accurate.
A lot of the news we receive is inaccurate, yet it’s hard not to think that it’s somewhat true. Even mainstream news sources are not immune to bias. For example, I’m sure you’ve seen the way the New York Times has run stories that contain factual errors. But even the Times has been known to take a few steps back on the things it believes are important.
Sometimes the things you see in the news are not even true, and they are not even the things the news sources claim to be. For example, the story about the death of Osama Bin Laden was wrong. But the story about how he died was not. The point is that you can’t really know when you dont know.