I didn't do anything other than make journalists have discussions and make journalistic choices that let me emphasize. That word never was aired. Never even said by anyone else on my show. I made those journalistic choices. This wasn't the case with, and it's fine. If you look up what their editorial standards were, you'll see hundreds and hundreds of uses of this word, but not by me. So clearly this was the incident that caused them to change their mind.
Read the full transcript here.
Besides the need to attract attention, what are some other drivers behind the news media's tendency to "catastrophize the normal"? To what extent does paltering take place on the politically left and right ends of the new media spectrum? Should journalists try to be as objective and unbiased as possible, or should they strive to make a difference in the world by highlighting particular issues that are important to them? Is the US on the verge of a civil war? Are prophecies of civil war self-fulfilling? Is it (and should it be) okay to reference certain taboo phrases by saying them explicitly? To what extent do journalists pull their punches because they fear angering the wrong crowd?
Mike Pesca is host of The Gist, the longest running daily news podcast in history, consistently ranked in Apple's Top 20 Daily News charts. During his 10 years as a correspondent for NPR, Mike guest hosted All Things Considered and the news quiz Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me. His work has been featured on This American Life, Radiolab, and Planet Money. He has frequently appeared on MSNBC, CNN, and The PBS Newshour, and written for The Washington Post, The Guardian, GQ, Slate, and Baseball Prospectus. Listen to Mike on The Gist, or follow him on Twitter at @pescami.
Staff
Music
Affiliates