There's a very interesting article in the New York Times that shows just how much information can be gleaned from phones [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/20/nyregion/pillar-grindr-catholic-church.html] . The article unfolds against the backdrop of political battles in the Catholic church. > Catholic Officials on Edge After Reports
(Note: Consuming Journalism is an attempt to look at how information is presented and how we can better approach that information, not necessarily the merits of the underlying arguments or policy prescriptions.) You've probably heard that advice about writing - make it personal. Well, this is personal - I'm confused.
[Note: I botched this in its original form. I started writing Consuming Journalism features a couple of years ago as an exercise in reading journalism more critically. In the original post, I let my frustration with unnamed sources steal the spotlight. I want Consuming Journalism to be a clinical, dispassionate
This post is about the preliminary coverage of a fatal shooting of a black man (some articles identify him as Dijon Kizzee) in Los Angeles by L.A. sheriff's deputies. I saw that both the L.A. Times [https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-31/man-fatally-shot-by-los-angeles-county-deputy-in-westmont] and Fox News [https:
Obviously, I cannot be trusted on my claims to have permanently retired the Consuming Journalism feature. I'd be better off (healthier, happier) if I could stick to that claim. We're back to the kompromat in a bad article by Michael S. Schmidt [https://news.yahoo.com/trump-miss-moscow-report-examines-120923516.html?guce_referrer=