94.7% of Journalist don't know how to READ!
The incompetence of many in the media!
The title for this, 94.7% of journalist don't know how to read, or they are too lazy to do their job with competence. I welcome any comments, and those who wish to bitch about it should really look at themselves first, and challenge the facts.
The truth is, ask a journalist why they decided to make this a career choice, and many of them will reply "to make the world a better place", which isn't what a journalist role is! Understandably, everyone approaches their profession with a certain degree of bias, opinions, and background of experience, but to be ignorant cannot be justified. Yes, ignorant because the truth is, and this is hard for most journalist to understand, is that a journalist is supposed to view events without any prejudice.
I decided to rant on this subject, after watching a student athlete talk about his desire once he finishes his pro football career, is to become a journalist. As he explained his thoughts and reasoning, it became apparent that his viewpoints were more important than what the definition of a journalist is. A journalist is supposed to report, research, write, and prepare news stories, interviews, etc. It is NOT to "change the world", there are other roles and professions that are entitled to that thought!
So...why do 94.7% of journalist know how to read? It is beyond comprehension, since they should, at minimum, be able to read as part of the job. Because, as any journalist should be taught, research is an important part of what they should be responsible for while preparing their report. I can prove that they don't know how to research and to read, unless they just want to admit to being lazy...which I don't think is the case, I just think they are misguided in all truth.
And that is what they, as a profession, must begin to comprehend, and that is an element of truth needs to be part of the story. Lets look at a few major topics that are currently evolving in the political and social realm of the United States at this time. Global warming and the re-distribution of income are topics that journalist continue to write and report on, yet they don't have much of an element of truth to them. I know, subjective and opinionated, yet they are both very provable with research and an analytical mind.
Lets look at global warming. Just this week, I am watching an ice breaker in the Antarctica near the south pole, and it was stuck in the polar ice that was supposedly (read Al Gore) was supposed to be COMPLETELY MELTED! The irony of all this, was that the ship that was stuck, was a ship graced with global warming scientist that had departed to conduct global warming experiments.
The inconvenient truth, was that journalist did not WANT to admit this, which tells me they are more on the agenda...changing the world for the worse? I dare say, there is a lot of truth to this! My problem with the journalist, and many of them do not have a scientific background to understand the complexity of actual science, don't bother to ask themselves the counter question. So if global warming is a science, why has 2013 brought more record low temperatures last year, than record high temperatures. You don't have to be a scientist to discover that, but the question is never asked.
Without going into an argument of global warming, which is not a science by the way because it does not follow the scientific method, the fact remains there is nothing to confirm that CO2 causes ANY warming at all! Does this gas possess thermo properties more than other like gases? Ask a scientist, I mean there are plenty of them out there that don't have government or agenda funding, and ask them how this works. None with any background of truth can admit or prove Co2 has anything to do with warming, yet journalist FIND the idiot who states it does, and writes it like this is the only person on earth that gets it.
That being said, why has the earth been cooling the last 10 years? Think anyone has thought that the sun is really the radiant heat provider? The sun is a very powerful star, making up 99.8% of the mass in the Solar System, do any of these journalist stop and ask a question about any effect from the sun? No...too lazy or incompetent, you tell me. But there are many other factors, and it SHOULD be the journalist that does some research before shooting their mouth off on what is really going on. If they did their job, they would discover how much Al Gore has profited from carbon credits, and how he really LIVES his life in the global warming mythology...that would be interesting and is quite a read!
Enough on the global warming side of journalism malpractice, what about the re-distribution of wealth theory. As usual, journalist LIKE the idea of the "liberal utopia", but too lazy to realize the inconvenient truth. As I have written about capitalism in this hub before, most can't admit the fact that socialism is a disaster for the poor and middle class. We all like to think, myself included, that equality for all with income and all our needs met is a great idea, the fact is we are all born with different talents, work ethics, dreams and visions. Trying to make everyone miserable under the guise of we are helping people is pure established lies.
I can prove this, and every journalist has the same access that I do, yet why can't they simply put the inconvenient truth to the test? Head in the sand? Yes, just like global warming. What proof do I have? We can start by viewing the past 1,000 years of history of mankind on the planet, and see that dictators, rulers, and socialist have one plan in mind...keep everyone as poor as possible and DEPENDENT on the government as the #1 objective! If you "sell" the fact that "it isn't your fault, someone else is responsible for your life", then they have you where they want you, dependent on them...after all, you can't change your status?
Socialist/Communist/Liberals are very much alike, the political system may alter slightly, but the idea is that they are the smartest ones in the room and know what is good for you. Did this work in the Soviet Union? Ever visit the Soviet Union prior to 1985? You bet, a liberal utopia for sure, free health care and a car. But lets look at the facts:
10 capitalist countries - top 25% income is - $36,691
10 socialist countries - top 25% income is - $5,188
So here we have a disparity in income, which would you rather live with? All things being equal, the good/bad/ugly, the fact is for income averages, looks like capitalism works. BUT, the smart journalist says, income re-distribution will make everything fair! But wait, why don't we look at how well THIS utopia looks:
10 capitalist countries - bottom 25% income is - $11,382
10 socialist countries - bottom 25% income is - $1,209
Looks like a FINE job of redistribution! That is the facts, Jack! Don't know why these so called people who have a degree in journalism can't do any research, all the information is available and it is all empirical data....which means it is free from any THEORY. I bold text because those who are so smart and don't believe me need to step up their game and start researching for unbiased truths.
So, we have the journalist and media portraying wealth equality as a method to provide for the poor and underprivileged, yet it never accomplishes this, and it never has. The argument of it not working in the past is the notion that the wrong people weren't put in charge, is another simplistic view of cover. A journalist should really go and research economic theory, the pros and cons, then look at its application to figure out how capitalism has lead to more economic freedom and distribution of wealth than the planet has ever seen.
The bottom line is that journalist need to review their role in society, and that is one of truth and substance over ideology. There are many people in the world that rely on media for their information, and by not providing the truth of the facts, is a disservice to those that have entrusted you with the standards and ethics that should be required to do your job!