journalists

If you claim to be a practitioner of journalism, what are you seeking to learn here, and why?

Are you appropriately registered as a journalist with privileged access to the Adelaidezone Digital Arts Quarter or have you left that important registration task too late?

What are you seeking to learn about the future, and why? 

Perhaps you are unaware that quality journalists are competent futurists.

What have you been learning about the future through twitter?

A kind and enlightened approach to journalism, like a kind and enlightened approach to economics and politics, provides a dignified expression of real leadership.

Why, then, do so many societies, groups and communities lack real leadership?

If you are here as a journalist, what are you seeking to discover about yourself, and why?

If you are not interested in discovering anything about yourself here, why not?

Whether you are a journalist or not, how do you promote well-informed kindness, intelligent frugality and a conscious awareness of liminality?

You may consider descriptiveness to be associated with exploration, whether through reading investment notes or writing a guidebook or studying a textbook or practicing journalism or researching a biography or typing a blog post or experiencing a physically more strenuous activity and following your curiosity in whichever direction it may lead you.

If you are a real journalist, do you usually present your reportage entirely in written words or oral words or both?

Perhaps you prefer to include pictorial illustrations and/or indications of body language and/or musical accompaniment when reporting to the public on a particular subject.

Perhaps you enjoy using emotive language in both oral and written form.  Such bad taste is certainly not something I encourage. 

What do you believe to be the societal purpose of your reportage?

What have been your experiences of enlightened editing?

If you are really and truly a good journalist, you will know all about how and why questions and how and why they are associated with explanations.  You will also know how and why the who, what, when and where questions are associated with descriptions of people, places and practices.

The answers to journalistic questions often require the subsequent demonstration of analytical abilities on the part of the questioner, especially regarding the contextual aspects of cause and effect.

Do you consider 21st century journalism to be a craft?

Unless you acknowledge that the mass media is substantially infested with ignorant and evil people, you will not understand, acknowledge and act appropriately in accordance with the dire situation facing the world, regardless of how many questions you ask evil people to answer.

You may even be employed by evil people.

You may be supervised by an evil editor.

There are many evil people with no care about the truth.  Their main goal is to make more money, regardless of the consequences for anyone else.

Such facts are rarely taught in journalism schools, apart from the ones here in the Adelaidezone Digital Arts Quarter.

When purported journalists fail to distinguish clearly between fact and belief, and report both as if they are of equal quality and value in terms of knowledge, those persons are not journalists at all but sycophantic propagandists and fools.

When people form conclusions on the basis of their political opinions and/or other cultural preferences, rather than scientific and historical fact, they are not quality thinkers.  They are propagandists, too.  They are not appropriate persons to interview for journalistic purposes under any circumstances.  They seek publicity, not democracy.

If you are a real journalist, the three virtues of reasonableness, morality and justice will keep you alert and unable to rest.

As you may have already noticed, only good people are permitted to be associated with Frugality Cottage.

How do your beliefs and attitudes relate to your education and upbringing, and your experiences of media and other products of culture? 

While the mass media has failed to serve the public interest in terms of setting a suitably democratic agenda for political scrutiny, no-one else has filled that gap, even with a large social media following.  That is why I am making an effort here.

Who does your journalism serve, and why?

Have other persons in the media often failed to report honestly and accurately, if at all, on the political agenda you support?

All journalism serves a political agenda, whether directly or indirectly.

Most corrupt people divert attention from their nasty activities and journalists often fail to notice that ruse.  

There is no corruption associated with Frugality Cottage, of course.

How do you compare philosophical objectivity with scientific objectivity and journalistic objectivity and political objectivity?

You are likely to be well aware that the gutter end of the news media much prefers to highlight unworthy cultures than worthy ones.  That is why worthy cultures receive so little media attention, and so little political and public respect.

Unworthy cultures are much more lucrative to predatory advertisers, as you will no doubt be aware.  Such advertisers have long been the funders of political and economic propaganda, directly and indirectly.

Participants in the cultural movement associated with the work here are mostly practitioners of writing therapy, especially in the forms of quality citizen journalism, enlightened policy compositions and beautiful investment notes.

Quality analytic journalism, including the properly democratic process of elegantly egalitarian editing, requires adequate investments by everyone.

Yet not everyone is appreciative of good journalism or quality editing or necessary investments.  

How will you report upon your experiences here, and to whom, and why?

What have you already reported, and where, and in what form and format and fashion?

Are you adequately accomplished in the composition of vernacular literature of the creative non-fiction, prose variety or do you prefer to degrade language through the garbage of journalese?

How poetic and otherwise musical will your future journalism be, and how do you know?

How clearly do you already distinguish between the appropriateness of old ways of doing things and the necessity for new ways of doing things?

What do you know about the patrons of quality journalism associated with the work here? 

What do you know about the Adelaide Adagia News Ensemble?

What is your acquaintance with Adelaide?

What do you know about the original Adagia?

What is your acquaintance with civility? 

What do you know about Twaklin?

You are likely to be well aware, by now, of the support provided within the Adelaidezone Digital Arts Quarter towards quality journalism, including philanthropic support under the guidance of the Spirit of Enlightenment.

Are you adequately acquainted with the history of suitable advisors and supervisors?

Suitable advisors and quality journalists respect nature.  They encourage the appropriate relationship between sense, rhetoric and music.

Unsuitable advisors are often noisy, like gutter journalists, corrupt politicians and self-serving billionaires.

When abuses of power are evident, why do journalists so often fail to ask powerful interviewees the most sensible questions?   

Are you adequately acquainted with the history of unsuitable advisors and supervisors?

What do you know about negative campaigning and the way it is reported upon by journalists?

What do you know about post-truth politics and the way it is reported upon? 

Perhaps the news media has distorted the truth in your mind and placed your political agenda in a false position of conflict.

Propagandists in the mass media and elsewhere may even have falsely presented your stance as aggressive.

How can you prove you do not have an aggressive stance?

How do you compare ordinary tourists with real journalists?

What is your acquaintance with my role here as The Author? 

I do not seek publicity.  I seek the improvement of democracy.

Are you here to help or hinder me?

Who have you most recently questioned on the improvement of democracy, and why?

How are people in positions of authority to be encouraged to act appropriately if not through the mass mobilisation of enlightened alternative media practices and appropriate community contributions to civic journalism?

How do you usually attempt to interpret feelings?

How do you compare one presentation of information with another?

Public awareness of inappropriate public policy and harmful political agendas is usually distorted and prevented through propaganda and mass media collusion, even when those dangers have been amusingly highlighted through satire.

When satire interprets politics more accurately and insightfully than journalism, academia and legal systems do, which of those methods of analysis serves the public interest best?

Amusement has never improved the world.  It has merely made suffering a little more bearable, at least briefly.

But what does improve the world, apart from good public policy, quality governance and the freedom to enjoy peace, prosperity and creativity without intrusions?

Honesty is obviously the answer.

When political satire fails to inform peaceful political movements properly, those movements fade away instead of flourishing.  In their place, corrupt organisations take control of the political agenda. 

Excessively ignorant persons often believe falsehoods to be true.  They rarely learn anything from quality satire, or quality journalism. 

Societal problems most usually happen when people in positions of authority have failed to act appropriately, regardless of the guidance offered by the Spirit of Enlightenment.

While analytic journalism unravels complexity in order to identify the causes of problems, it really solves nothing.  And nor does any other form of journalism.

While political satire expresses amusement in the face of problems, it does not address problems either.

But how do you attempt to show enlightened leadership?

Whose tune will you play, and why?

 

Comments

Post a Comment