1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Resistance Journalism

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Alma, May 19, 2020.

  1. Regan MacNeil

    Regan MacNeil Well-Known Member

    I absolutely agree that top-level journalism has become way too cliquish. But I'm not sure Farrow is part of any clique in that regard. Certainly he's much less guilty of it than pretty much the entire NYT organization.
     
  2. swingline

    swingline Well-Known Member

    Maybe it's just me, but I don't see what's wrong with being on the right side of history.
     
    2muchcoffeeman, OscarMadison and Liut like this.
  3. Jerry-atric

    Jerry-atric Active Member

    Even when I disagree with them your posts make me think, which is why I signed up here!
     
    Donny in his element and Liut like this.
  4. Regan MacNeil

    Regan MacNeil Well-Known Member

    Thought this thread was amusing:

     
    2muchcoffeeman likes this.
  5. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    I try to beware any journalist who desires it. It means they're too interested in making history.
     
    Liut likes this.
  6. Jerry-atric

    Jerry-atric Active Member

    And I was just playing with Mr. McNeal.
     
  7. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    The Slate thing is analysis of analysis of analysis of a story. My head hurt from trying to figure out which quoted passages were from the book, which were from the Times and which were from emails back and forth with Slate.
    I tend to think criticism of Farrow is generally reasonable in this instance.
     
  8. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    The Slate piece exists, IMO, as resistance journalism. Farrow is a bright guy who can defend himself.
     
  9. Regan MacNeil

    Regan MacNeil Well-Known Member

    By that rationale, can't Lauer also?
     
    Jerry-atric likes this.
  10. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    A huge part of what Smith wrote, I think, is accurate and fair criticism. And I agree that a lot of people don’t want to hear it because blah blah blah the details are bullshit, the gist of the story feels true. And I think in general sense, his stories are a true. Matt Lauer is an work-place predator, Harvey was a rapist, NBC did shut down his story, etc.

    And I agree that some of the pushback against Smith is rooted in some liberal ideology of wanting to be on the “right side of history.” Which I don’t like, because we’re deciding already the the issue matters, not the details. But I’d argue as much as it’s driven by liberalism, it’s driven by performative Twitter culture. I think Lauer has a good case that he didn’t anally rape anyone. But what we get in push back to that is “Imagine being Matt Lauer and thinking anyone wants to hear from you right now!” and using it as a surfboard to 5,000 retweets. Well, if Matt Lauer has some evidence that could exonerate him, I’d think we’d all like to hear it. It would be dishonest and cowardly to not hear it. Unless we’ve already decided Lauer is bad and the details don’t matter.

    Where I’m not on board is this idea that Trump is the framing for any of this, other than he’s such an awful person and his people have shown they’ll defend literally anything he does, to the point where I guess all accusers who are liberal are liars (Ford) and all accusers who are conservatives are 100 percent telling the truth (Reade). That isn’t a debate about journalism at all, that’s just bothsidesism to the nth degree.

    Farrow’s stories would be even better if they didn’t fudge a few things or leave a few out to try and make a more streamlined narrative. There is no doubt in my mind Harvey Weinstein is a rapist. There is lots of evidence to support such a claim. If someone accuses Lauer of rape, EVEN IF YOU KNOW HE IS A SCUMBAG you owe it to journalism to do more than just throw it out there and pretend it’s airtight. And he’s owed the chance to respond too, even if he’s a shithead scumbag.
     
    garrow, Jerry-atric, Liut and 3 others like this.
  11. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    Lots of good stuff on this thread.

    I want to repeat this one last time, because I think it's important: something stinks about this NYT story. To me, it's not about being on the right side of history, or defending Farrow, or whatever. It's that line about Lauer not wanting to comment on the record, and then writing a blog about Farrow the day after the article appears.

    Whatever everyone else's feelings are....that doesn't sit well with me. It reads like Lauer got the Times to do his dirty work.
     
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    So is Ben Smith.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page