This was the beginning of the end of journalism

This was the beginning of the end of journalism

Funny, I'm listening to a song called Listen to Peyote.

maybe, but it was a fun way to go.

>dude it's okay to make shit up and insert your own bias as much as possible if its in service of progressive political ideology

The 68ers fucked every institution they touched, but they outright raped journalism to death. HST is one of the reasons why journalism is now a dead profession, you can't make a living as a journo anymore, and journalism schools are shuttered, and public trust in the media is at an all time low. Good thing he shot himself after he recognized he was just inflicting his mental illness on the world through his typewriter. Fuck hippies and fuck HST I say this as a fan.

eh, it was inevitable.

Journalism never began. It’s literally impossible to be objective about literally anything. Even subject matter they choose to write/report/ about, since the beginning of time, is subjective.

This is why the saying, "history is written by the Victor's," exists for Christ's sake.

>hurr durr we're objective! We have an unspoken code!
Horseshit. Always was. Always will be. Hell, the top award in the industry is named after a guy who started yellow journalism. It is and always was and always will be a joke.

Every work through all of history needs to be viewed with a critical lens that the author is bullshitting you.

"the 68ers" (in itself, a very loaded and ambiguous term) merely exposed the problems of said institutions. You can't just expect a society that bases itself off reason to work on good will, maybe if the enlightenment hadn't been so unreasonable things would be better now.

The 68ers marched through the institutions and turned them against their own purposes in order to debase the civilization those institution supported.

>maybe if the enlightenment hadn't been so unreasonable things would be better now.
literally wut?

Why does every 20 something fresh out of school hipster fuck try to write gonzo and fail?

>familiar with gonzo
>confused as to why young people try to imitate it

Explain
Now
Now

>Every work through all of history needs to be viewed with a critical lens that the author is bullshitting you.
Who has time for that mess
I'd rather be slandering my enemies and bolstering my friends, while seizing power and disregarding reality

jk


i have no friends

Christ

the civilization in question is garbage, illegitimate and unsustainable that your own psychopathic proclivities prevent you from realizing this is irrelevant. It had to be done
durr hurr haven’t read Adorno

both of you are disgracefully ignorant

Give me one example of modern kids trying to do gonzo.

Hst is the only one who's ever attempted it

...

>Western Civilization was unsustainable that's why we had to actively work towards destroying it
Do I even have to post a brainlet pic for this one?

>pretending journalism can be unbiased
>thinking it's wrong to just accept it's biased and embrace journalism as a valid way of capturing the flavor of a point in time

>Every work through all of history needs to be viewed with a critical lens that the author is bullshitting you.
this is something that needs to be stickied on every board. Hell, on every website.
Can you imagine how different the cultural landscape would be if people asked "why is this person telling me this information" more often instead of blindly believing everything they hear?

whats that
So you think Vice and Buzzfeed is good journalism?

Thanks for correcting the record Hillary

>retarded leftist ideologues projecting their own psychopathic inability to shut the fuck up about their reality-denying agenda onto normal people then using that projection as an excuse to publish 3,000 word hysterical rants cursing God for Trump taking two scoops of ice cream as news coverage

Have you ever considered the possibility that you're possessed by a demon?

Looking back on the 2010's 20 years from now, reading BuzzFeed and VICE will provide a perspective into the era through an undeniably opinionated lens.
As far as reading about current events and commentary they are absolutely shit.
As far as looking back on the era in a cultural sense they have merit in voicing a particular sort of feeling.

HST gives a good commentary of the 60's 70's and 80's from the point of view of cynical hippies.
But go back in time 40,50,60 years and his work is just shitty biased documentation of current events.

That being said, I love HST and his work in a historical sense. Journalistic integrity means being true to what you see so readers can factor it into their own opinions. As a reader it's your responsibility to form opinions yourself, not take them from so-called "unbiased" journalists.

And of porn, which peaked with the first two installments of the Taboo series.

Event: Leftist outrage at two scoops in 2017
Reaction: Shut up snowflakes
Importance: None

Event: Leftist outrage at two scoops as seen from 2050
Reaction: Wow, the media sure was irrational in their coverage of President Trump back then.
Importance: Portraying the hysteria of the 2010's pop culture environment.

So, yes. Two scoops is a important piece of journalism, we just don't value it yet.
Journalism is like wine, regardless of whether or not it ages well or turns to vinegar, there's no use judging it when it's just been made.

have you ever considered that you are and that’s why you want to make a mass blood sacrifice to ancient death gods?

>you want to make a mass blood sacrifice to ancient death gods
books for this feel?

Is not impossible. Science has to deal with a lot of sensible subjects and yet here we are.

HST never pretended he wasn't an actor in the story. He talked at length about what he chose to cover and why, and his opinions were his opinions. That's what was revolutionary about it. Pulling back the curtain and revealing that our understanding of politics was shaped by a gaggle of drunk sub-morons following a campaign bus around like tour groupies.

The trick in modern journalism is this: It pretends to be an objective perspective, but is in fact all driven by opinion and identity. They've taken the idea of a journalist as an actor in the political environment the idea of the journalist as actor and shaper of opinion, but tried to cloak it back in respectability.

Precisely.
We too often confuse reporters and journalists.

so how do you pull the curtain back and channel that spirit?

is it just that young journalists are assigned their pieces and attempt to write about things they don't give a fuck about in the HST style filtered through by academia?