People Want Analysis Of The News, Rather Than Just Facts
from the probably-maybe dept
Last summer, Carlo wrote up a fantastic analysis of what's wrong with journalism, which highlights the false focus on objectivity. The point he makes is that there's nothing wrong with reporting the facts, but people get value from the interpretation, analysis and insight that people provide around the facts. That's what we've always tried to do around here at Techdirt. I, personally, chuckle whenever anyone complains about "bias" or a lack of objectivity here. We've never claimed to be reporters or journalists. We've never claimed to be objective. From the very beginning of this site's existence (I know, since I was there), it has always been about giving our opinion and analysis of the news. If we don't have an opinion on something, we probably are a lot less interested in writing about it. And, despite the anger by a small subset at our "non-journalism," we've found that most of our readers read us because they value that opinion and analysis. In fact, in the coming months, expect to see us dive even further into insight and analysis.That's why it's interesting to see reporters coming to terms with new studies suggesting that opinions are exactly what younger people are looking for in their news. The editorial worries that this inevitably results in the lowest common denominator of angry commentators like those you see on the various cable news channels, but that need not be the case. The thing is, people don't value opinions for the sake of opinions -- they value opinions based on facts (which is often missing from cable news). That is, just because people want opinions, it doesn't mean that the facts go out the window. They want to know the facts, and then they want to see the interpretation of it. They mostly understand opinion for what it is, knowing that the analysis is based on the facts, and that leads to other interpretations and analysis.
In fact, despite the claims of an internet "echo chamber," one of the things that makes the internet such an interesting medium, is the idea that anyone can respond and discuss stuff. If someone disagrees with our interpretation of the facts, we want to know about it, and we want to discuss it. That's how we all learn and we all become smarter. So those in the news business shouldn't fret the value that people put on opinions these days. Those opinions still need a factual basis, and the ensuing discussion often highlights more important finer points that are missed if you're just staring at the objective facts all day. But that's only going to happen if traditional news organizations recognize the value of opinions -- and the ability for people to talkback and discuss those opinions (and the facts they're based on).
So far, though, that doesn't appear to be happening. Tim Lee points us to an LA Times editorial that gets plenty of facts wrong while trashing bloggers as being only interested in opinion. Yes, certainly, there are some folks out there who are only in it to make a point or be heard. But it's the combination of facts and opinion and analysis that has the chance to make these discussions that much more meaningful. It doesn't mean that you do one side without the other. It means, both are needed together.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: facts, newspapers, opinion
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
opinions are exactly what younger people are looki
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: opinions are exactly what younger people are l
Great musicians got that way by.... listening to other artists! Great thinkers sharpen their skills by.... assessing the though processes of other thinkers!
Personally I like both. I prefer opinion articles at least state the facts they're basing their opinions on... Nothing will turn me off of a site faster than realizing that they're telling half-truths in order to "prove" a point. To me that just proves you never had a point if you have to lie or leave out pertinent facts to support your argument.
Anyway... I wish more Americans would read both sides of the issue (opinions and all) and then find the "truth" behind the issue that best suits them. No, we all wouldn't likely find the same "truth" but that's OK. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing as long as we respect and understand the opposing view enough to find a suitable compromise when appropriate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: opinions are exactly what younger people a
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: opinions are exactly what younger people are l
Actually, it's the opposite. It seems like people want to think critically, and by being able to see analysis and opinions along with the facts, it helps them to think more critically -- and rethink what they've been told in the past.
The great variety of opinion, and the different interpretation of facts out there can often force a person to think more independently. If you have two people who violently disagree on their opinion, but are basing it on the same basic facts, it forces you to really think critically for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It has always been so
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It has always been so
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It has always been so
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sheeple
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sheeple
Actually, that's not at all what's happening. When people give opinions based on the facts, it forces people to think through whether or not those opinions are really supported by the facts, and also to seek out other opinions (or see if any facts were misstated or left out). The idea here is that by allowing analysis and insight into the news, it can help drive a further, deeper understanding of the news.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wall Street Journal
Young people may want opinions (so they don't need to think for themselves) but smart people want facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wall Street Journal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wall Street Journal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wall Street Journal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wall Street Journal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Liberal Media
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Liberal Media
I doubt we'll see the same type of selfish rebellion that the socially regressive folks of the Boomer Generation performed. Of course, that's just my opinion. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE LIberal Media
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frankly...
Opinions and insights are NOT facts. They are conclusions draw based on the facts at hand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
Exactly.
Lot of talk here about "facts" and "opinions" and who wants what, but first you need to determine if what you are getting is the facts. I'm all for hearing the opinions of the facts by others but, first of all, I'd like to know just how accurate these "facts" are. I don't necessarily believe everything the politicians, or media, tell me, so I try and get accounts of the same story from as many different sources as possible and then read the opinions and interpretations of different people. Hopefully this process will give me something close to the truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I like to see the intelligence level of the person delivering the facts. Maybe he has opinions different than mine and can enllighten me? I also enjoy watching those with lower IQs deliver facts and then give their opinion, it gives me a great insight on how the fox news watchers think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Opinions re news....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There are times when I think an intelligent, educated opinion is a great resource, so long as you recognize that they are still coming from their distinct viewpoints and biases, no matter how based in fact it attempts to be.
Also, as an aside, what do people think about the media watchdog site, Center for Media and Democracy? http://www.prwatch.org/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I think they're left of center
political flacks. But they're
entitled to their opinions as well.
A well balanced diet of propaganda
would include some of this along with
some worldnetdaily, or what have you.
It's kind of bothersome, you'd expect
the reporters to make some attempt to
keep their personal bias out of the
story, which should be a REPORT of the
facts, hence the title reporter.
But over time it was inculcated in the
budding journalist that they need to
interpret their reports for the benefit
of the great unwashed masses, to explain
in simple terms what it means to the
pitiful lives of the peasants and
describe how it might effect their
sorry state of existence.
If a reporter willfully injects their
opinion into a report and then denies it,
in my opinion, they're a propagandist
not a reporter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
learning requires objectivity.
The author claimed having experienced cases such as these had trained scientist to remain open to even the slimmest possibility that even the obvious "truths" and accepted "scientific facts" of our time are not quite correct and that the "impossible" is in fact simply improbable.
My point to all this is as follows. While opinions are great for tabloids, blogs, and perhaps even sites like Wired, nothing can be learned in a conversation where people just give their opinions. People have to remain objective enough to change their opinions if a solid well founded counter argument is made.
This is something I have to tell some of my students: the moment you insist on being right is the moment you lose the ability to learn. Being right requires you to literally know everything. Learning requires you to acknowledge that you do not know everything.
And so I say again opinions have their place, but nothing can be learned from opinions alone and objective reporting of facts make forming an unbiased opinion of your own much more likely. The "journalists" may not be truly objective in their reporting of the facts but that is no excuse to throw objectivity to the wind. Giving opinions of your own is all well and good if you are willing to be honest about your level of objectivity and are willing to give all the facts, not just the ones that support your opinion.
As for people wanting opinions. I want a pizza with pepperoni, black olives, mushrooms, and extra cheese, a 2 liter bottle of Sunkist, and to watch a good Anime flick. However, seeing as the ideal weight for some one with my height and body type is 160 pounds, and seeing as I currently weigh over 260: what I NEED is fish, some salad, and lots of exercise. Moderation applies to more than just eating habits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: learning requires objectivity.
I want the facts AND I want hear/read others' objective opinions. Then I want a chance to give mine. Perhaps I might find enlightenment or confirm what I thought I already knew.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: learning requires objectivity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: learning requires objectivity.
Which is what I said in the post. I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with the post (though, the tone implies that). But the point was that opinions need to be backed up by facts -- and that neither alone is very valuable. Facts by themselves without analysis don't get you very far either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IMHO, the conservative media/political proponents, have been far worse at providing factual information. Sure the liberal media does tend to leave a lot to be desired, but when I listen to conservative talk radio or read conservatively biased articles, they seem to almost belittle anyone that would try to apply real logic to what they're asserting.
I mean come on, in both elections one of George Bush's big campaign points was that Gore(2000) and then Kerry(2004) were too "intellectual"... what exactly does that mean? Did we really elect a president because he WASN'T as smart as his opponents? I never understood how that worked. Anyway... I really think America's greatest issue right now is our LACK of ability to constructively debate our common issues. We're the UNITED STATES of America, but our recent political "leaders" have turned us into the SQUABBLING IDEALOGICAL FACTIONS of America. I honestly know in my heart that the majority of American's could figure it out if realized that we could. But instead we end up healing that if you're a liberal, then you must think X... and if you're a conservative, you must think Y... Then the people that assume they must be one of the above simply stop thinking... THERE is where your lack of critical thinking skills comes into the picture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't remember one of Bush's campaign points being that Gore and Kerry were too intellectual. Perhaps you are remembering someone's bias that you read or heard somewhere which influenced your bias. There may have been reference to an "intellectual elite", but that's a different thing altogether.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Best to Have a Reliable Source for Facts
But most people don’t have the time, or especially the inclination, to do so. That’s why I think that it is useful to have dependable source for objective facts (and yes, such things do exist, despite the inconvenience they often produce for both liberals and conservatives). Then, if people want opinions, like I do, let them delve deeper, but at least give them access to a resource that is factual to judge any opinions they read.
What is scary to me is the number of people who don’t question what they read or see in the news. They are essentially outsourcing their brains to whatever media channel agrees with their ideology. These folks often have no idea they are being misled or even purposely lied to. Fox (Faux?) News is especially bad about this among the “mainstream media”. O’Reilly gets his facts wrong on a pretty regular basis and rarely acknowledges his mistakes. They’re too numerous to list here, but one egregious mistake that he keeps repeating is that “after Malmedy, some German captors were executed by American troops”. Actually, in the incident he refers to, it was the Nazis who executed Americans. After the second time O’Reilly made this claim, Fox News actually attempted to edit their website transcript. After they got deluged with people calling their attempt to change the facts on their news story, they changed the transcript back. Fox News has been documented to misreport facts and instead report stories that are factually incorrect. They have even gone to court to defend their right to lie to their viewers (http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/11.html).
All news outlets make mistakes. But the mainstream Left (CNN, etc.) is much better at admitting those mistakes than the right is. The far Right and far Left (Pacifica, etc.) are not much different from each other in their willingness to deny the consensual reality.
And before I get jumped on by the Faux News lovers: NO, I’m not a liberal, not even a Democrat. As a matter of fact, if McCain were by some wild chance to get the Republican nomination, I’d probably vote for him over any of the Dems in the race.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Best to Have a Reliable Source for Facts
And before I get jumped on by the Faux News lovers: NO, I’m not a liberal, not even a Democrat. As a matter of fact, if McCain were by some wild chance to get the Republican nomination, I’d probably vote for him over any of the Dems in the race.
I'm glad you have an idea of who you would support (even if he doesn't get the nomination). Finding up info on the candidates is aggrivation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Problem with vast majority of reporting these days facts are "edited" to suit the reporter or media's companys opinion.
Real reporting where all the obtainable facts are revealed and then a opinion is presented is far and few between and normally reserved for in depth humanitarian articles that really don't matter much to the bigger picture (except for those involved), things like sex slaves, poverty in some third world country (that has no economic or political importance of course) so forth
If money, politics or power are involved you have to go to half a dozen sources and try to build a picture yourself to get the facts, never knowing if even then you have the whole truth
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even with the facts agreed upon, opinions are not the whole picture. You have to consider the values behind the opinions. Does the speaker value the rights of management over labor? Labor over management? etc.
More often than not, it is these kinds of value judgements that generate opinions. When weighing someone's opinions, it's wise to consider the source.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When I want your opinion...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
so USA-centric!
Come to think of it, you just need to watch Fox News. That's so blatently subjective that Sky News managers objected to resource-sharing on the basis that the Fox News content was unusable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Opinions
Do I lack critical thinking abilities? maybe, but I cannot be an "expert" on everything, and it is often useful to have a piece of news analysed by somebody who has experience and qualifications on that subject.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All news reflects opinions.
It's not that young people want opinions over facts, it's that they realize that ALL NEWS reflects the opinions and biases of the reported/editor.
I, and most people I know, would much rather know the biases and opinions of the reporter up front.
I still want the facts, but I don't want the person who is giving those facts to me, to hide or mask the opinions and biases behind his/her presentation of those facts. their opinion is useful to me, both in determining the veracity and slant given to the facts and as an analysis of those facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re : DT
Tim
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The media caters to its customers. I love the Wall Street Journal, but I would imagine that people from the lower class probably don’t believe that the reporting in the Journal is unbiased. From a laid off worker, the reporting on the cost cutting initiatives probably seem very biased.
I see more and more people becoming less tolerant of hearing an opposing opinion. You see this in national politics but I think that is because that is how the country actually is becoming. Grass roots, everything is local. It doesn’t matter which side it comes from, because it comes from both sides. Here in NJ, you will find the left attempting to silence the right, demonize their opinions and refuse to hear or to even let the other side be heard. You see it on blogs, you see it locally (democrats won’t even debate republican town council candidates) you see it on issues like DRM, patents, net neutrality and more.
Is it any different from the right? Look at the war on terror. GWB stating that you are either with us or against us. Saying that those that questioned the direction were un-American. Facts? Who knows. If in the future the Iraq war plays out well and there is eternal peace in the Middle East, GWB will go down in history as the man that solved one of the planets most difficult issues. He will be a hero. Currently he is known as an idiot and a fool.
Don’t blame the media, they are just serving up what their customers want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facts and opinions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]