Reader-submitted question: …what about the reporter/comedian’s content? He’s still an active reporter, and he’s joking, to an audience, about being a snake and formulating controversy out of nothing, and embracing lying – is this ethically appropriate? Does it undermine whatever public confidence is left in our media?
Hmmm.
Here’s the relevant section, starting at about 1:57:
That’s a critical skill, if you’re a journalist, is the faking it. I read a poll recently that said journalists are the least trusted, they are renowned as the slimiest professionals in a community. I don’t know where you guys live, but where I live, there’s lawyers! There’s bankers! And I’m like, I thought I was into social justice and storytelling or whatever, and I have assumed the role of the worst slimiest snakiest fuck in Yellowknife! And at the time, I thought this made me uncomfortable. But in hindsight, it’s perfect. I am a fucking snake! Have always been, and will always be. So if you work for the GNWT and I come up to you in the street and say, “You know, it’s the coldest day so far this year in winter, what do you think of it?” and you say, “I can’t talk; I work for the GNWT”, you’re right to do so, because somehow I will find controversy in what you said. Conflict, that’s what we’re looking for. Exploitation. We’re snakes. I had to get used to it, but it’s really fucking grown on me and I love it. I love exploiting all of your trouble. And in hindsight, this all makes so much sense to me, because I’ve been a liar my whole life. I’ve had unbelievably rewarding experiences with lying. Like, the ultimate goal of a fucking lie is to not get in trouble. But some of the best lies I’ve ever told, I didn’t get in trouble, and I received praise and accolades! It’s very rewarding, telling a non-truth if you pull it off right.
OK, I see what you’re saying.
I laughed, because I know Loren, and I know that he’s not a snake. And I’ve been the weary reporter who’s just trying to get tape for a stupid story about the weather. I’ve been furious with snotty PR types who insisted on recording interviews, presumably because I was planning to chop up my own tape and exploit the person I was interviewing.
But if you don’t know that context, is this appropriate? Even with the context, is it over the line? If this video showed a lawyer joking about screwing clients over, would it be funny? What if it was a video of a doctor joking about misdiagnosing cancer?
What do you guys think?
I think he needs to wear a big sarcasm punctuation mark on his shirt or hold up a sign when he’s doing that schtick.
Honestly, I totally don’t care. As far as I’m concerned, journalism is a job like any other, more useful than many and less useful than some, and like in any job, some people are average at it, some are a standard deviation above or below, and some don’t give a Ford as long as it puts food on the table. I don’t think there is a big aura of prestige or anything else about it, I don’t think it really matters whether the people who do it are starry-eyed about it or not… It’s just a job.
Some people just take things way too seriously, in my opinion.
It is obvious that Loren is being sarcastic. But when I read what I heard, it does sound bad. But I still don’t think he was crossing the line. I thought Loren was making fun of the perception of “reporters being liars” that many Yk’ers share. It’s not a very inviting mentality for new journalists. It must feel like discrimination. I think it’s a very comical view of a “Yk ugly.” Although we live in a great community made up of great people, we aren’t perfect.
And I also agree with the idea that we are not defined by what we do but by who we think we are. And so, the reality Mongoose describes rings true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
Nope, it’s inappropriate. He is undermining public confidence in what he does and, sarcastic or not, people are going to buy what he is selling here. If we can’t trust our journalists, and I happen not to much of the time, then we are going to have to question most of the information we receive on a daily basis. This may be a fun philosophical exercise, but in practice is quite problematic.
On the same theme, what do you think about journalism creating more news. For example the whole deal with Toyota. Sure there were problems, but once it hit the national media people started getting panicky and now journalism is able to report on THAT. Further the panic is driving new complaints which are in turn covered by the journalist. Sure the story is real, there are real problems, but in the very act of reporting, new news is created.
This is like one of those funky quantum physics problems where when you observe something to be what it is, in the act of observation you change its essential nature and it becomes something different. In the communication form of “Journalism,” at what point does the journalist become a part of the very news which he (she) is reporting?
Context is everything, if you truly want to understand what is being said.
I don’t know where this quote came from. I might see it in a totally different light if it was
on a personal blog, full of sarcasm, vs in a traditional media interview. A person’s comments take on a life of their own when they are repeated, in a different context and read in conjunction with other people’s comments about the intention. Usually you are pretty good about linking to the actual source. Why didn’t you do that in this case?
My error! The link provided wasn’t working on my machine.
Sorry for questioning your blogmanners, Megan.
Yeah, I should be clear: the link in this post goes to the original video, where you can see the quote in context. I have only transcribed part of the bit.
I have to disagree with Jason on this one. I don’t know Loren from a hole in the ground; or perhaps more accurately, only as a voice on my radio. I watched the video and I didn’t see the giant sarcasm punctuation mark over his head (what would that look like exactly? But I digress…) Here’s a guy most people in the audience probably only know from the radio, and he is feeding every twisted perception the public holds about reporters. It demeans the profession. I don’t mean to imply the profession is exemplary, but when you run down what you do all the time, you are reinforcing ill-informed perceptions instead of correcting them, which leads to the whole downward spiral thing. It’s like lawyers telling lawyer jokes, or to use Megan’s example, doctors joking about misdiagnosing serious illness. It doesn’t matter that at heart, it isn’t true – a lot of people are going to think it is true, and reinforce that reality until it becomes a reality.
Personally, I think someone who makes such “jokes” in a public forum like Loren did has probably reached a point in their career where they aren’t, in fact, OK with how it works and perhaps need to think about making a change. Because what I see in that video isn’t sarcasm, it’s anger – anger at how media really works (the self-propagated Toyota panic, for example) and anger at the small part he plays in making sure the machinery works every day. Although he protests to the contrary, I think he very much minds his “snakelike” conduct. And that’s sad for a guy his age.