Study Hall Digest 10/29/2018

By Study Hall staff writer Allegra Hobbs (@allegraehobbs)

Journalists: Should They Have Opinions? Should They Share Them?

Remember the good old days of unbiased, straight-shooting, trusted media men like Walter Cronkite? What ever happened to them? Ah, yes, now I remember — people who are not older white men gained an IOTA more political and mainstream cultural power. Then everyone got digital platforms on which to broadcast their thoughts. Now we have to contend with all these factions whereas before we had one channel on which one white man told us what was happening in the world — so annoying!

We’re talking about perceived bias and trustworthiness in journalism this week because Politico Editor-in-Chief John F. Harris insinuated the president might be a white nationalist and some Republicans lost their shit because, first, that’s not very nice, and second, as a journalist you’re supposed to withhold “partisan” opinions. There’s a lot to unpack here, beginning with what is considered a partisan opinion and what is simply an observation rooted in evidence.

In the wake of the kerfuffle, NBC published a bad piece on “the temptations of Twitter” exploring this nightmare world spawned by social media: “One errant observation, or an improperly worded thought, and journalists can find that they’ve inadvertently exposed their own biases to the world.” In light of this danger, the piece says, some media companies have implemented strict social media policies for their journalists — Axios strictest among them.

Reporter Karen Ho questioned the Axios policy that prohibited reporters sharing political opinions, noting that many issues cast as “political opinions” are also stark moral problems that disproportionately impact people who are… not straight white men. Are journalists not supposed to have opinions on higher maternal mortality rates among black women? Child internment camps?

Then there’s the question of who determines what is neutral — generally, Ho observed, white upper-class cis men are considered neutral in all things; their attachments to certain topics are more likely to be considered “expertise” than “bias.”

“My lived reality and experience, like my experience with the U.S. immigration system and being a minority, is considered a bias instead of an expertise,” Ho told Study Hall. “If you are a woman who has experienced childbirth or experienced getting birth control, that’s considered a bias.”

Ho noted when she wrote her Time magazine cover story on Crazy Rich Asians, she found herself contending with the idea that it was a political view to believe Hollywood should stop whitewashing films meant to have Asian characters.

Imposing a veneer of “neutrality” on your reporters benefits certain groups while further marginalizing others. I would also argue it benefits those in power. Reporters routinely venerate police and the armed forces and it is not considered unbalanced, but if you were to criticize those very powerful institutions you’d be branded “biased.” Recall how when John McCain died so-called neutral reporters leapt to breathlessly eulogize him. Curiously, that was not considered a partisan stance, even though McCain was a partisan figure. “Bias” seems to only work in one direction.

The real concern here seems to be ostensibly left-leaning publications winning the trust of right-leaning viewers — when media executives talk about retaining public trust, that’s what they mean. That’s a losing game. The viewer already knows journalists have opinions, and obscuring them isn’t helpful. Right-wing nutjobs have this figured out, which is why they took to gleefully chugging celebratory beers about Kavanaugh’s nomination, but the New York Times was reprimanded when a reporter stated her opposition to the appointment.

“Fox and The Daily Caller and all these right-wing publications, they just don’t give a shit about objectivity or bias or facts — they keep blurring the line between news and opinion,” said Ho. “Bret Stephens, he doesn’t give a shit. You’re holding the people who already have the most disadvantages being in the news industry to this standard.”

SURPRISE: Megyn Kelly is Still Racist!

You know her from greatest hits such as “Santa Just is White” and “Jesus Was Also White.” But now she’s back with her new single, “Blackface is Fine,” and current employer NBC is not thrilled! Neither are black NBC staffers, one of whom called her apology “fake and dismissive.” So NBC is giving Kelly’s Today segment the axe. I have no doubt because this is the latest PR nightmare in a series of PR nightmares, her ratings had already plummeted, and the best business decision is to cut ties (albeit with a hefty payout ($69 million!!!!).

It can’t be because NBC executives are actually horrified by her racist opinions, because she aired those freely at Fox and they were surely aware of that when they chose to hire her. Indeed, many at NBC were baffled by the decision to hire her and are reportedly glad to see her go. “It’s a mix of frustration and relief — frustrated that we’re in this position, but relieved that the Band-Aid has been ripped,” one staffer told the Daily Beast.

Twitter Is Cool with Nazis…But Wants Us All to Argue Better?

Following repeated pleas to ban Nazis in light of repeated harassment on the platform, and especially light of the recent sickening onslaught of anti-Semitic violence and mail bombs, Jack has said he would like to…remove the “like” button from Twitter! To improve the quality of “debate”! Ah yes, let’s clean up the discourse between journalists and Nazis who wish them dead!

It should be said that whether Twitter will actually act on this whim is unknown, and it very well could have been a one-off, ill-thought-out comment from Jack his PR team is now cursing. But it remains true Twitter is a habitable place for dangerous bigots and the platform has done nothing to stop it. Jack doesn’t seem willing to do anything about it This is even more unforgivably moronic in light of the revelation that the man accused of mailing pipe bombs had previously made a habit of making racist threats on Twitter, and the platform determined he had not violated its rules.

Time: The Freelancer’s Quandary

Over at The Cut, an informal “Time Week” kicked off with a piece from Edith Zimmerman arguing the merits of waking up “crazy early” — like 4 to 5 a.m. early — and then a complimentary piece from Katie Heaney arguing the best time to go to bed is 8:45 p.m. This led to a rebuttal from Anna Silman, who said because she’s unable to fall asleep before 2 a.m. she has to wake up no earlier than 9 a.m. so please LET HER LIVE. Early-riser Gabriella Paiella then came in with a unifying piece on the indisputable fact that afternoon is the worst time of day, when you hit a fatigued slump and have to wait out the rest of the day.

I find myself caught in the middle of the great time debate — my anxiety-induced insomnia usually makes it impossible for me to fall asleep early, yet I desperately yearn for the perceived superiority and aggressive productivity of the early riser. As a result, I tend to drift off around 1 a.m., but defiantly set my alarm for 6:30 or 7 a.m. only to hit the snooze button repeatedly until closer to 8 a.m., or shut off my alarm altogether and resign myself to a 9 a.m. rise.

But as freelancers, we have the unique opportunity to modify our schedules around our preferences — sure, most reporting must be done during certain hours, and pitches are best sent during work hours (though even then, editors often keep non-traditional hours when it comes to responding to emails!) But writing can be done anytime. I personally find myself to be most creative and active at night and most clear-headed in the morning, but totally useless in the afternoon, so if I’m on deadline it’s not unusual for me to both write late into the night and ALSO wake up early-ish to finish it off. I’ve found that a piece of writing I’ve labored over for hours during the cursed afternoon can later quickly come together in a burst of midnight productivity. Anyway, if I’m not working I’m almost certainly lying awake with my mind running a mile a minute, so might as well write! When do you wake up? Sound off in the comments, lol.

Longread of the Week: A Longreads deep-dive on the state of bookselling, bookstore unions, and The Strand workers’ ongoing fight for fair wage increases.

SHORT LINKS:

— The New York Times this year launched a travel program in which it sends one lucky journalist to a dizzying 52 locations, tasking the journalist to write a story about each place. Jada Yuan, formerly of New York Magazine, is the inaugural traveler and is currently on place 23! The dispatches are like personal travel journals infused with reporting with tips on where to go and what to see. Yuan is currently in New Zealand and it seems… stressful! Anyway the deadline is TOMORROW so if you want to be chronically fatigued for a year but experience a bunch of cool shit, have at it!

— Breitbart is considering a lawsuit against Twitter account Sleeping Giants for effectively shaming advertisers into cutting ties with the white supremacist garbage dump. I guess next time don’t be a white supremacist garbage dump.

— Trump predictably blames the media for the divisive climate that is producing violence… against journalists. Yes, I’m sure the problem is newspapers, not the president of the United States stoking racist paranoia and virulent anti-press sentiment.

— StoryCorps continues to fight for a fair contract — a fight that began a year ago this month — with unionized workers picketing the site’s fundraising gala this past week. As a reminder of how seriously management takes requests for fair wages and healthcare, a management attorney flippantly told staffers they should “vote for Bernie Sanders” if they want such luxuries for “free.” Liberal media!

— Law360’s union, represented by the News Guild of New York, has announced it has voted overwhelmingly to authorize a strike of necessary after two years of fruitless contract negotiations…Liberal media!!!