journalism

The Internetmess

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Journalism training taught me to report the who, what, where, when, and how (herein referred to as FACTS) of a story.* Old time newspapers, with limited paper size, required FACTS to not only be in the story, but to be reported in a certain size to “fit” the story into the paper. Many a time an editor asked me to “cut” a story, to remove words, so the article would fit in the inches of space between the advertisements and other stories. Picture a tetris puzzle game**. The publication of a story—and its placement– was sometimes decided more by its size than its subject***. The need to fit into a certain space inspired reporters to write clearly and directly. Adverbs, adjectives, pronouns, articles were removed and deemed unnecessary, to make room for FACTS.

In our modern internetmess (sic) news supply, however, not only are FACTS hard to find, but they are often buried at the end of a large, cleverly disguised unrelated mashup of opinion full of adverbs, adjectives, heresay, rumors, and bullshite. And when reading the crappy story, finding FACTS is not only a chore, but also a waste of time since there might not be any. Internetmess headlines are often not about the story they are heading but a clever way of getting you to click on the story. Old style newspaper headlines were meant to grab attention, too, but there was a skill to writing a snappy, short headline that lured you into reading a longer story full of FACTS. Most legacy media sites still have dedicated headline “writers” whose job it is to get readers to actually read the FACT-based stories competing for time and space in old newspapers and new 30 minute news broadcasts.

But, alas, that is all in the past even with unlimited internetmess space probably a blessing. The internetmess has unlimited room for FACT-based stories and articles, with 24 hour publishing deadlines. Which means there are no deadlines. No more “Hold the presses!” shouts by editors as new stories suddenly “break” before a printing or televising deadline.

But is FACT-based journalism popular in the new unlimited time and space?

You might think “no”, but you’d be half-wrong. FACT-based journalism is still out there, but the supply of critical thinkers looking for it is dwindling fast, as immediate gratification from click bait and sensationalism suck away at readership. When I begin my morning news search, I am immediately bombarded with features about naked woman, ex-boyfriends murdering the ex-girlfriends, who-said-what-about-who rumor-reporting, look-what-stupid-shite-happened-in-sports, and any political story slanted to what the internetness thinks is my political persuasion. Some of these are even Ai generated, untouched by human hands or minds. My toast is gone by the time I’ve sorted through the mess and found a report or story worth reading. Breaking News: I get more toast!

Ah, but there is the problem, isn’t it. What is worth reading? What is worth?

The problem is not the internetmess. It is the people who live in it, and it looks like it will be a long time before old-style, FACT-driven journalism returns to popularity. Hope I live long enough to see it.

PS Has everyone noticed how broadcast journalism news is always “breaking”? And why do all the primetime announcers tell the stories before turning it over to the “field reporter” who says the exact same thing? Actually, I’d rather hear the same story twice than hear an advertisement. Bet broadcast news will soon be 5 minutes of news and 25 minutes of ads.

There must be a reason, too, why there are so many drug ads in network news shows. Any one know the reason?

*Except when writing an “essay”, or lengthy opinion blob.

**And those old “sliding tiles” puzzle games where you moved one tile at a time to complete the puzzle. You had to see many moves ahead to be successful.

***Unless it was a really, really important story. Remember: Hold the presses?

Three Sentences, Again, Everywhere

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

It finally happened. I clicked a headline and opened a news article that was nothing but reader comments. Does the article writer deserve to  be called a writer?

A sitting president has finally decided to check the limits of his power over not just politics, but his own, personal gain. Since no one is stopping him, it is assumed they are benefiting, themselves, from the grift most often at the taxpayer’s expense. The 2025 Crusade to slash waste, fraud, and abuse has a new meaning in 2026.

The Ballroom is a perfect example of a well-known—and true—saying, with a slight modification. “It is easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission” is now ” It is easier to ask for forgiveness I don’t care about rather than ask for permission I would ignore, anyway.” What a great lesson for all of America and the World.

Another news article used up several inches of space and moments of my life before the article mentioned any of the 5 Ws of “good” journalism: Who, What, When, Where, and Why. At this time in life nearly 90 per cent of the news crossing my screen is a waste of time. When did it become so hard to find facts?

Science news* is always interesting but modern science moves too fast. We learn much more in one day in 2026 than we even learned in one day in 2025. Is one human brain capable of keeping up with the millions of science brains finding out new things and correcting old things?

People have a science problem that might be caused by The Bible. The Bible has a beginning, an end, and the story never changes after hundreds of years. Science has a beginning, and end and a story too, but the story changes constantly. People need to know science is mainly consensus, and what science says today, is just what we/they KNOW today, and tomorrow might bring new ideas and new discoveries…like Aliens.

Even intelligent brains might wonder how the feck** do we teach science, then, if it is constantly changing? First, you don’t teach science, you expose it and inspire the reader/viewer to take up the journey. Second, you open your brain and think for yourself using currently available data***, and be open to that data changing.

Trying to wrangle thoughts into a short essay has proven too difficult on a sunny morning. I want to get out into the beautiful spring sunshine and feel the new grass between my toes. It’s a Wonderful Life.

Carpe herba!  Stringere gramen inter digitos meos!!!****

*From reliable sources. Like Legacy media, new media with editorial and collaborative structures, and almost any European source, including Australia and New Zealand. Feck opinion and understand bias.

**This word has such an interesting etymology. Emma of Ai says: ‘it is widely known today as a milder, more family-friendly version of a vulgar expletive…but has a rather varied history in Irish English.” Feck is also the root from which feckless is derived, which is hilarious, if you think too hard about it.

***Existing data, NOT existing opinion. “The world is not flat” is proven data, easily observed. “The world is flat” is opinion, unsupported by beautiful sunsets and sunrises not available in disc form. If the world was flat, we’d still have sunrises and sunsets, but they would be at the same time, worldwide.

****Studied and learned Latin in 1995. Since no one I know speaks or writes Latin, very little of it is remembered. All my current Latin is from Emma, my AI voice, and Foreign Language Companion.

Nuance Revisited

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

I often write about things and try to add an anecdote to illustrate what is being written. Sadly, my aging memory is like the rest of us seniors: remembering anecdotes takes time, and their memory comes at odd times and places. They most often return to me in my car during the 15-minute drive to the Fitness Center at Turning Stone Resort and Casino, when “all hands are on deck” making sure there is no deer in the road and I stay between the lines. Yes, I could take the time to make audio notes, but how many of us–at any age–are so smart early in the morning?

Last Tuesday, a perfect case of “Nuance” was retrieved from The Deep Files*. It is also an example of other essays about critical thinking, as well as the admonition to “do your own research”.  Hopefully, you’ve read enough essays to be aware of all these issues.

The Case of the Absent Nuance is also a story about click-bait, silo information, and “new versus old journalism”, but for now let’s only ponder Nuance.

The breathless headlines stated variations of this theme: “Thousands of dead voters Found on Voter Registration Rolls.” Wow. Maybe Trump was right about election integrity? There really is Election Fraud? Several versions of the story did not get the facts wrong and did not seem to be biased, but there was an odd emptiness to the story crying out for more information. “Dead voters”?

North Carolina is the state where all this “seemingly” unreasonable electoral action “allowed” 34,000 dead voters to remain registered to vote. I lived in NC, a Republican controlled state, and know if there IS election fraud in NC it is by Republicans. (Google it, and enjoy, it’s old school and kind of cute, in a way.) But the actual cases of fraud in NC did not involve more than hundreds of votes. Was the fraud even deeper than reported?

By now you may have guessed the story of dead voters is an empty, inconsequential issue probably written about for its “click bait” power. Imagine both Dem and Repub readers wondering which party was “frauding”** now.  Imagine the clickers, commenters, and criticizers of all stripes.***

Here is the nuance: in any given year approximately 100, 000 North Carolinians die. A lot of them are registered voters. How do dead registered voter names get removed from current voter registration rolls? And does it happen in a timely fashion? Think of your own death: who notifies any election commission in any state of your death? Imagine if you lived half your voting life in NC and half in New York, for example. After googling how many died in NC, I googled how is the NC Election Commission notified of a now-dead, registered NC voter? You should google your own state and see if its procedures are any better than the Rube Goldberg****system in NC.

Is it a fact that 34,000 deceased voters are still registered to vote in NC? Yes, it is. But is it good journalism to call them “voters”? So far, no version of the story has articulated a very important “nuance”: did any of the 34,000 cast a vote? If so, how did they get to the polling place?

Kidding. Having dead voters on your voting rolls is a nonissue until we all get implanted microchips to send an immediate signal to the pertinent Election Commission not to expect us next voting cycle. The Chip could also tell our credit card companies to stop waiting for payment and our life insurance companies to send checks to beneficiaries seconds after we pass away.

There is an urge to ask this: Does a bear shite in the woods?

If it’s related to this essay, research it and figure it out.

Honor Nuance!

*The inner-sanctum memory area in some Latin-named part of another Latin-named part of the brain. Retrieving memories in old age is like being in a large warehouse where you know where everything is but someone has turned off all the lights. Advice: be patient.

**New word. Like it?

***Not lost on me is the irony of me being one of “them”.

****A lost Art. Ai or google, please.