When we began THE DAILY HOWLER, we suppose we viewed it as a political project. Now, though, we often tend to see it as an act of anthropology. A basic question keeps coming to mind: In the American context, are we humans smart enough to perform the basic functions of journalism? This fundamental question came to mind once again when we read today's New York Times. ... Swarns' performance is especially clownish because of the context of this "reporting." In the very next paragraph-in paragraph 6-she discusses the fact that Joseph Biden made a clumsy statement about Obama's race! But right before this rumination, she herself broadcasts a set of statements about Obama which are utterly false! And yes: People do come to believe false claims when false claims appear in the newspaper. Are we humans smart enough to perform the simplest acts of journalism? The question had already come to mind when we read today's columns by David Ignatius and Eugene Robinson, and when we tried to decipher the start of this report by Amy Goldstein. But Rachel Swarns-page one of the Times-sent our analysts back to their desks. They puzzled again about a deep problem. They pondered the state of the race. ... We'll pass you on to Paul Kiel for this, although we'd express certain points somewhat differently. Note: Some statements, including this one by Biden, are extremely hard to transcribe if you're trying to be fair to the speaker. In such cases, journos should simply present the transcription which comes most easily. But expecting our "press corps" to deal with such matters is like asking gorillas to invent fine perfumes. Swarns' transcription removes several things which were actually said in this exchange. And when TV hosts insisted on reading the simplified text for themselves, they also dumped Biden's inflections. By the way, who was dumbest of the dumb last night? Not O'Reilly! O'Reilly played the actual tape, letting viewers hear what Biden had said On Hardball, though, a consummate dumb-ass read the transcription in his own voice, with his own inflections! Are humans smart enough for this game? Watching Hardball, must humans really ask?
...
Swarns' performance is especially clownish because of the context of this "reporting." In the very next paragraph-in paragraph 6-she discusses the fact that Joseph Biden made a clumsy statement about Obama's race! But right before this rumination, she herself broadcasts a set of statements about Obama which are utterly false! And yes: People do come to believe false claims when false claims appear in the newspaper.
Are we humans smart enough to perform the simplest acts of journalism? The question had already come to mind when we read today's columns by David Ignatius and Eugene Robinson, and when we tried to decipher the start of this report by Amy Goldstein. But Rachel Swarns-page one of the Times-sent our analysts back to their desks. They puzzled again about a deep problem. They pondered the state of the race.
We'll pass you on to Paul Kiel for this, although we'd express certain points somewhat differently. Note: Some statements, including this one by Biden, are extremely hard to transcribe if you're trying to be fair to the speaker. In such cases, journos should simply present the transcription which comes most easily. But expecting our "press corps" to deal with such matters is like asking gorillas to invent fine perfumes. Swarns' transcription removes several things which were actually said in this exchange. And when TV hosts insisted on reading the simplified text for themselves, they also dumped Biden's inflections.
By the way, who was dumbest of the dumb last night? Not O'Reilly! O'Reilly played the actual tape, letting viewers hear what Biden had said On Hardball, though, a consummate dumb-ass read the transcription in his own voice, with his own inflections! Are humans smart enough for this game? Watching Hardball, must humans really ask?
