Just Stop Oil, the group that made headlines for high-profile stunts to protest use of fossil fuels, said it was ending protests in museums after achieving its initial demand.
The NYT takes huge ad payments from the oil industry. Industry reps get regular access to reporters in non-news contexts as a result, and this spills over into the background beliefs and attitudes a lot of them have
Really? Source on the claim that ads influence individual journalists? That seems odd to me, since the journalists writing articles would have no clue about advertising.
Do you know about your company’s marketing mechanisms? Most people don’t, whether it’s about placing or receiving ads.
It’s not a direct impact; it’s that the ad buys get the oil folks access in a way that you and I don’t have. The journalists end up at things like conference panels with oil folks, and not so much with activists or scientists, and the editors choose who to put on a given story.
Why are you arguing in bad faith? That’s obviously not what they meant.
Your opinions and thoughts are shaped by the totality of your experiences. That single conference is just one example. And journalists are not super human- they are human just like me and you; subject to influence and sometimes yielding to “status quo” industry norms.
You’re not attempting to try and understand what the other commenter is trying to communicate, instead making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. That is the definition of arguing in bad faith.
Also, what do you mean by woosh? Were you joking or something? I am not familiar with this term if it’s supposed to mean something.
The NYT takes huge ad payments from the oil industry. Industry reps get regular access to reporters in non-news contexts as a result, and this spills over into the background beliefs and attitudes a lot of them have
Really? Source on the claim that ads influence individual journalists? That seems odd to me, since the journalists writing articles would have no clue about advertising.
Do you know about your company’s marketing mechanisms? Most people don’t, whether it’s about placing or receiving ads.
It’s not a direct impact; it’s that the ad buys get the oil folks access in a way that you and I don’t have. The journalists end up at things like conference panels with oil folks, and not so much with activists or scientists, and the editors choose who to put on a given story.
Oh, so the journalists are too stupid to think for themselves because they went to a sponsored conference?
Would you be brainwashed by a single conference?
Why are you arguing in bad faith? That’s obviously not what they meant.
Your opinions and thoughts are shaped by the totality of your experiences. That single conference is just one example. And journalists are not super human- they are human just like me and you; subject to influence and sometimes yielding to “status quo” industry norms.
Lemmy is absolutely overwhelmed with bad faith posters with dubious motivations.
woosh
Maybe try rereading everything?
You’re not attempting to try and understand what the other commenter is trying to communicate, instead making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. That is the definition of arguing in bad faith.
Also, what do you mean by woosh? Were you joking or something? I am not familiar with this term if it’s supposed to mean something.
It’s supposed to be the sound of a joke flying over one’s head. Basically means “it was a joke”.