Discussion about this post

User's avatar
No name here's avatar

This is going to be offensive to some people, but... Conflict-avoidant women and emasculated men are the root cause of this.

Most know the type - they're all over the media, HR, and marketing departments. Very good at message alignment because consensus is viewed as the goal. Absolutely terrible at dealing with objective reality because any idea that deviates from the consensus (however false) is viewed as a threat.

Expand full comment
Roland's avatar

A couple of observations based on my years – long ago – in the newsroom of a major metropolitan daily paper:

Reporters seldom have a thorough understanding of the things they write about. To be fair, it's just not possible. I noticed early on that every time there was a story on a subject that I personally knew a lot about, there were errors. Most people probably have experienced similar. If there aren’t outright mistakes, there’s that generally lame feel that tips you off instantly that the writer doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. It always made me wonder how many of the stories on subjects that I didn’t know much about were also inaccurate. Probably most.

Reporters and editors generally have little interest in anything technical, especially when it involves machines and how they work. Much too low-brow to bother with. Many months after the space shuttle Challenger disaster, a story came across the wires with the final findings of the investigators. It revealed manufacturing errors made on the seals between sections of the solid rocket booster casings that were blamed for springing a leak and setting off the big fuel tank. I won’t get into the details, but here at last was the actual physical cause, and it was a machining deficiency that I had not thought of. An aha! moment for anybody interested in how that magnificent machine was put together and what brought it down. I assumed this would be Page One news, and I lobbied for treating it as such in our afternoon planning meeting. Big yawn. I don’t recall whether it even made the paper. The story was technical in nature, with no drama or bureaucratic finger-pointing. In other words, it was not the sort of soap-opera crap that would get their juices flowing, so some very important findings on one of the most memorable disasters in US history were ignored.

Expand full comment
40 more comments...

No posts