Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The goal of science is for experiments to be repeatable. If I were to build a copy of the LHC under my house, presumably I would be able to verify any of CERN's results.

But I can't verify anything in journalism. If two reporters watched something happen and their accounts differ, who is right? No one knows, and both will be accused of bias.




Is water wet?

Maybe!

The point being that there are plenty of journalistic enterprises that are not especially sensitive to bias.


Funnily enough, by at least one scientific definition of wet, water is very, very not wet. Water has an extremely low wettability, and in fact will even wet most other liquids.

I always find that phrase when used as an example of common sense funny in that regard.


Yes when they are void of anything to do with journalism (Plane goes down)

The second you add journalism to the mix you are getting into bias land no matter how you turn it around.


I think when you say 'journalism' what you mean 'analysis' vs 'reportage'.


No,

"Journalism is the production and distribution of reports on the interaction of events, facts, ideas, and people that are the "news of the day" and that impacts society to at least some degree. The word applies to the occupation (professional or not), the methods of gathering information, and the organizing literary styles. Journalistic media include: print, television, radio, Internet, and, in the past, newsreels."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism


This seems at odds with your earlier statement: Yes when they are void of anything to do with journalism (Plane goes down)

I can't really figure out what point you're trying to make but that's OK, doubtless it will be clearer in some other context.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: