Maybe I was spoiled, growing up in an age of W5 and Dateline news reports. Or maybe my memories are blurred with time, but I seem to recall that journalism used to mean something. Reporters actually went looking for facts and the meaning behind the story. They actually presented news in a way that supposedly allowed the reader to understand the events affecting their lives.
At the moment, all the articles about the WGA strike seem to be carbon copies of one another, providing little beyond the basic information provided in the first couple of days. And without behind-the-scenes interviews and opinions by experts providing a peek into the motivations of the people driving the decision-making, readers are left to be influenced only by their natural compassion for the below-the-line workers losing their source of income.
I'd like to think this is a masterful example of the media being used to influence public opinion, but I have the lowering feeling it's because the people writing the articles can't be bothered to find out what the drivers behind the issue actually are. Or worse, they don't know how to find out. Which is scarier.
I don't pretend to be a journalist. But from the outside looking in, several things jump out at me: