Recently, I took a look at the Time magazine website. Supposedly, the website is a reliable place for "Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News....", according to the slogan that can be found next to the name in the website tab. While browsing through the home page, one particular article stood out; it was labeled "This Hangover Cure Will Make You Richer".
As if the title wasn't enough to tell that the article did not follow the very first Yardstick of journalism (newsworthiness) , I continued to read. Within the first paragraph, I noticed a major flaw. Journalists, with the exception of commentators and critics, do not use first-person pronouns. Insulted, I did not pursue the rest of the article: "What kind of news source is this?"
You simply cannot be the source of unprofessional articles such as this while trying to maintain the face of a "Breaking News" source. First of all, it's frankly quite confusing. Time is a "Goodwill" of stories; while not only housing all of the old, used articles that no one wants anymore, it also is the home of all of the strange pieces that everyone is questioning the relevance of. Relevance is yet another Yardstick of journalism.
Being such a hodge-podge of stories in a sense is also unfair to the sum of journalists who face real work everyday to meet deadlines with breaking, real news. You simply cannot post articles on the iPhone 6 a week after the rest of the media released the information. It is useless, to put it bluntly. It is also unacceptable for a "news" publication to fabricate their articles based off of other news publications which work, and sometimes risk their lives for a piece.
In conclusion, Time magazine is not a sound source of information as it claims, but rather a means of entertainment.
Sources:
The Time piece is more like a column or opinion piece than a news article, and as such does not qualify for our media critiques.
ReplyDelete