indigozeal

You've probably come across this post by the New York Times public editor asking his readership "whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge 'facts' that are asserted by newsmakers they write about." In other words, he's asking if reporters should report instead of simply regurgitating press releases that're presented to them.

Overblown transition: I've always considered Brave New World to be present a much more plausible and relevant dystopia than that of 1984, with the masses kept in line by peer pressure and bread and circuses rather than the wasteful and overly troublesome crush of total, omnipresent thought control. What I take away from this article, besides that every reporter should change his or her job title to "truth vigilante" immediately, is that the media isn't a million miles away from "we have always been at war with ~~Eurasia~~ Eastasia" unquestioning parroting of the establishment party line. I'm not being alarmist; we're a bit away from the Ministry of Truth - but in an age when the Chicago Sun-Times no longer endorses political candidates due to pressure from its corporate owners and and political candidates can freely assert things that're utterly, utterly untrue to see them not only go unchallenged but also become conventional wisdom and the New York Times has to ask if it's OK if it actually reports on news, it's clear we're losing the checks on institutional communication that keep officials some approximation of honest.

Now back to ignoring reality in favor of posting multipage rants on 20-year-old games.