Monday, 17 March 2008


Honestly, what 'experts' are these? Why doesn't the article name them or even quote them? Because the entire story is bullshit and the journalist knows it, but doesn't care, that's why.

I don't mean that the story is made up: I'm certain that some idiot or other has contacted the papers about it and the reporter has duly and idiotically written it down. But it is such painful bullshit. A teacher has decided that this amazing behaviour is down to body chemistry. I doubt she is even a biology teacher, so why on Earth would she be quoted? Especially since there are supposedly 'experts' involved and they are not quoted, apart from one word. You just can't quote someone on one word: isn't that the most extreme example possible of out-of-context quoting? And why would you call in experts in static electricity anyway? Has it been determined that the problem is down to static? No. Has it been determined that there is a genuine problem anyway? No, of course not, because there isn't. Nobody has called in any 'static experts'. A reporter probably asked someone who once changed a light bulb and she said "its a mystery why you are asking me such an idiotic question". Hence, static experts have been called in and claim the issue is a mystery. Bullshit.

The story about the cancellation of the awards ceremony is an especially annoying example of conformation bias. Projectors and computers break all the time, but because he was present, it was attributed to him. If it even happened: how does a 'slide show' 'begin' to 'crash' anyway? What could that even mean?

And how did they go about 'calling in' these 'experts' anyway? Are they in the yellow fucking pages under 'static experts' or something? On what basis have they been 'called in'? Are they being paid? By whom? Are they conducting a proper study? Of course not because the whole suggestion is ludicrous.

I'm genuinely sorry to be so pissed off about this, but I despise this kind of credulous reporting. Pretty much everyone involved knows that it is bullshit. The journalist, editors, news services etc. certainly know it. But nobody cares. Nobody cares that people are being deliberately misinformed. Nobody cares that stories like this increase the amount of stupidity in the world and decrease the amount of critical thinking. They figure that none of this matters if they manage to sell more stories. I wouldn't mind at all if it were an in-depth piece and the reporter had bothered to chase up a single source, waste of time though it would be. But he/she didn't. Lazy, credulous, fucking idiotic journalism.

No comments: