The Decline of Professional Journalism

Let's be objective here. When I was in high school, I worked for the school paper. We had some very strict guidelines we worked by, and our supervisor made sure that we followed them. We did not allow:

> Anonymous sources of any kind
> Unsubstantiated claims
> Unprofessional headlines
> Libelous statements that couldn't be backed up

All of our headlines were straightforward, grammatically correct, and conformed to proper journalistic conventions. If the cafeteria started a new lunch system, our headline was exactly that: "Cafeteria Begins New School Year with New Lunch Program." Not "THE CAFETERIA JUST STARTED A NEW PROGRAM AND TWITTER'S RESPONSE WAS PERFECT!"

I don't want to make this a partisan issue, but while right-wing headlines clearly have some bias (Breitbart is the easy example), this type of idiotic headline is only seen in left-wing publications (pic related).

Who is behind this trend, Jow Forums? Why do all journalists suddenly seem to be special needs children?

Attached: Screenshot (168).png (1400x524, 86K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/571BuZeeQjE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Who is behind this trend, Jow Forums? Why do all journalists suddenly seem to be special needs children?
The news media is behind it. They can measure which headlines generate the most clicks and most people are just above functionally retarded so the headlines reflect that.

>decline

buddy the decline was 75 years ago. it's been in the lowest level of hell for 30 years now.

Sounds about right, you have to understand just how many fucking braindead normalcattle retards there are out there senpai

The world is slowly going retarded. Reminds me of idiocracy, pic related

Attached: 463B5C00-66F7-46F7-803E-B7FBE2ACD17A.jpg (250x223, 28K)

This is the headline for an op-ed, you dope.

youtu.be/571BuZeeQjE

Stfu salty leftist. Suck on Trumps cock, bitch.

The problem is everything is an op-ed now

1984? Newspeak, true mainstream journalism died years ago

lol, so will you retract using that headline as an example? Probably not. The entire premise of this post instantly fell apart.

You're talking to the wrong person, newfag. And the point stands because this is an unprofessional headline even for an op-ed.

Attached: twisted brainlet.png (645x729, 127K)

Watergate happened and the journalists who took Nixon down were respected. Now they're out shilling for Pelosi. Something happened between 1974 and now.

do some research kiddo

Attached: thisasshole.png (640x480, 611K)

Very simple. Newspaper front page headlines have always been clickbait!
>extra extra
>read all about it
>jews declare war on germany
It's just that now the journalism that used to come with your newspaper has to stand on its own merit, and now what people want are endless advertisements.

Instagram literally has people pretending to be sponsored! They're doing it for free!

>just noticing that journalism is a shame'
Nigger, the fucking media got us into war against Spain in the 1800's, you are just now noticing how shit it is?

>Who is behind this trend, Jow Forums?
Why do you ask questions when you already know the answer

Attached: this is considered news.png (646x500, 477K)

>the main point is the claim that left-wing publications make unprofessional headlines (there are three other claims, but you didn't back any of them up)
>this is supposedly more common among "left-wing" publications rather than "right-wing" publications
>the main supporting example is actually an op-ed
>op-eds don't follow strict guidelines
lol, your point doesn't stand at all. Op-eds can say whatever the fuck they want.

About that

Attached: 9BE513D3-E757-4525-AA81-E46BCFE0EF8F.png (1334x750, 308K)

An op-ed can say "nuke Israel," but that doesn't mean CNN is going to publish it. Obviously they hold themselves to a certain standard. Do you seriously think that news outlets will just publish any old bullshit so long as it's under the header of "op-ed"?

The standard is clearly going downhill. Stop shilling for the Clinton News Network and actually respond to the claim.

>whatever the fuck they want
...as long as it gets through an editor. Left wing editors are leaky sieves.

The internet allowed anyone to start pumping out "news", such as Buzzfeed and Vox and Huffington Post....

The big guys (CNN, NY Times, NBC...) now have to compete against the internet news sites such as HuffPo and the internet since 2005 has been one big sewer pipe

CNN was a normal news channel and news website up until about the year 2003 or so, they had a leaning bias, but it was normal, there were no stories about Transgendered kids, the age range of employees at newspapers and TV channels has also dramatically fallen, most local newspapers are stocked with 24-year-old girls who just graduated pumping out the news, Brian Stelter over at CNN was considered to be the "veteran news chief" by age 30 or so

Attached: cnn_200-100007753-orig.jpg (787x563, 297K)

You are a retard. This is an opinion piece, just look you’ve been told. Now stfu and leave this thread to die.

death to chatham house

The onus is on you to support your claims as you have presented them, and you have failed to do so. Revise your post and try again, as it stands, none of your points are logical.

Yea same. And there was a difference between journalism and an opinion piece.