This is my all-time favorite insight about journalism.
When I think about the gross incompetence of the average piece on e.g. encryption, it's good to remember that I shouldn't assume anything else is better unless I have a specific reason to think so.
It's also motivated me to start checking primary sources really aggressively. I may not know enough to do detailed analysis on court rulings, sociology papers, and the like, but I can at least cross-check basic statements of fact with the source. And shockingly often, they're just not true. The coverage of e.g. Trump's travel ban was often totally detached from reality - not even in politicized ways, but via simple "never even read the source" foolishness.
It's depressing to realize how much journalism isn't at all value-added over a zero-commentary list of facts or quotations.
When I think about the gross incompetence of the average piece on e.g. encryption, it's good to remember that I shouldn't assume anything else is better unless I have a specific reason to think so.
It's also motivated me to start checking primary sources really aggressively. I may not know enough to do detailed analysis on court rulings, sociology papers, and the like, but I can at least cross-check basic statements of fact with the source. And shockingly often, they're just not true. The coverage of e.g. Trump's travel ban was often totally detached from reality - not even in politicized ways, but via simple "never even read the source" foolishness.
It's depressing to realize how much journalism isn't at all value-added over a zero-commentary list of facts or quotations.