Why doesn't "journalism" have a definition that keeps hacks (DOOCY) out of the press briefings?

[UTUSN]

*****QUOTE********

https://www.mediaite.com/opinion/peter-doocys-attack-on-vp-kamala-harris-was-outrageous-and-over-the-line/

Peter Doocy’s Attack on VP Kamala Harris Was Outrageous and Over the Line
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

.... That’s very bad news for the American people, because no matter how nimbly Psaki handles all of this, these are the people responsible for shaping the views of the American people, and they are being led around by someone who is not in the same profession they are. ....

If any reporter had made a comment like that about Vice President Mike Pence, even a fiercely adversarial one like CNN’s Jim Acosta, he would have faced a blizzard of rebuke, and not just from Fox News. And he would have deserved it. As Doocy demonstrated with his later questions, you can be tough and adversarial without resorting to personal attack.

But Doocy, who wears the thin cloak of the “hard news” profession, doesn’t merit so much as a raised eyebrow.

Fox News can pretend there’s a difference between their news and opinion talent, and Psaki can entertain the pretense to the extent that necessity dictates, but the rest of the media should stop playing along with this charade and give Doocy the shunning he deserves.

*********UNQUOTE*******

[demtenjeep]

1. well-what exactly did he ask this time?

not all of us get to participate every second

[UTUSN]

2. I can only post 4 paragraphs so I select the ones for my point. Rest is in the link.

But his other hack question today was to ask President BIDEN whether he "was OK?" because his "voice sounded different" and he coughed.

[Bettie]

4. See Below:

“Is the vice president not satisfied with the staffing that she has had so far? Or do people just not want to work for her anymore?” Doocy said.

From the linked article.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

3. I wish Psaki would just ignore this troll.

[ruet]

5. So You'd Be Good With The Next Re-Thug President...

only allowing OANN, Newsmax, and Fox to ask questions during pressers? ...becasue everyone else would be "fake news" to them?

[UTUSN]

10. Uh, that's not what I said. I asked why "journalism" is so ill defined as a profession that

any old hack can claim to be practicing it. Theoretically, 'reporters" should be ferreting out substantive facts, not attempting to further their own ideological and personal predispositions.

*Other* professions, say MDs, have at least window dressing self-policing for practicing. Not to say that several MDs in Congress aren't batshit/wingnut crazies.



***** So, "Repuke presidents can (also) do it" is the same rhetorical argument used against deleting the filibuster or "both sides do it"?

[grumpyduck]

6. Just talking points for Faux.

He's not a reporter, just a line feeder.

[pwb]

7. To Fox the question is the news?

Because they always answer it in their own speak. What is your opinion of the question they argue, then they make shit up.

[Haggard Celine]

8. Why do people always pronounce his name wrong?

I'm pretty sure it's pronounced "Dooky."

[brooklynite]

9. Provide one...

[samsingh]

11. because our side continues to be 'nice' and keeping our head high

while ignoring the slashing of our shins and knees by the rabid taliban republicans

[dumbcat]

12. Who gets to make up the definition?

And who gets to enforce it?

[UTUSN]

13. Who gets to define and police MDs and other professions?

[dumbcat]

14. Usually an association of said professionals

In the case of "journalism", there's a bunch of them.

[UTUSN]

15. Hence...

[ruet]

18. Not The Same.

Police wield the power of government. Doctors, lawyers, etc. are required to be licensed. Literally anyone can be considered a "journalist". ...have a YouTube channel where you read aggregated news items? You're a "journalist". It's up to the hosting party to define "journalist" for themselves. Which surfaces questions of bias/censorship if you exclude a group because you don't like the question they asked.

[Caliman73]

16. Those professions also have their difficulties with definitions.

Doctors of Osteopathy can also practices as medical doctors and see patients and do what MD's do.

Ask me what a counselor is. A therapist? Police, peace officers, deputies, etc... Campus police are police too with certain jurisdictional differences.

Language is malleable.

What is a Theory? What do people mean when they say, "I have a Theory about the Loch Ness monster?


I understand your point. Doocy is a bad faith actor, from a bad faith network. Right wingers utilize Liberal constructs and concepts to promote their agenda. They distort the meaning of words and concepts frequently.

Ask Greene, Gozar, Boebert, etc... to define what they mean by "Socialist" or "Communist" because they use the words frequently.

Journalism has certain defining principles and methods. Certainly you could ask a professor of journalism and get a pretty decent answer. The problem is that anyone who can get a credential because they represent an organization with the money to call itself a "News" organization, can claim to be a journalist. If it is Doocy today, it could be Acosta tomorrow.

Also, notice WHO is NOT there in the room. Do we ever hear any questions asked by Democracy Now? From Mother Jones? or any other farther left leaning press? Why is that do you think? The right is represented, the mainstream is represented. Who is not represented much in journalism and why?

[UTUSN]

17. Glad that my point is clear. But as for other professions having"difficulties with (own)definitions"

yeah, but they at least have, as I said, window dressing of some kind of standards and credentials.

Well, if "Journalism has certain defining principles and methods", seems like a wide open door - start with DOOCY and continue on to "Jeff GANNON".

As for asking "Greene, Gozar, Boebert, etc" for definitions of anything - I would have laugh-spit liquid if I had been drinking anything!1