I think all of those rules are explicitly against actual journalism, unless they’re supposed to be ironic. It is unwise to make ironic rules. Ignorant and autistic people that either do not understand how they’re ironic, or just miss the irony, will be learning the wrong lesson.
The original post mentions them as things that demonstrate bad journalism - I was indeed facetiously mentioning them here because I’m impressed this article is excellent because it avoids every one of them and does the exact opposite (e.g. “don’t quote an expert”, immediately quotes an expert to rebut the claims)
Sorry I wasn’t clear. I’m not a big fan of the tone of my original comment either, but I’m not sure how to fix it (besides the edit at the bottom)
I think all of those rules are explicitly against actual journalism, unless they’re supposed to be ironic. It is unwise to make ironic rules. Ignorant and autistic people that either do not understand how they’re ironic, or just miss the irony, will be learning the wrong lesson.
The original post mentions them as things that demonstrate bad journalism - I was indeed facetiously mentioning them here because I’m impressed this article is excellent because it avoids every one of them and does the exact opposite (e.g. “don’t quote an expert”, immediately quotes an expert to rebut the claims)
Sorry I wasn’t clear. I’m not a big fan of the tone of my original comment either, but I’m not sure how to fix it (besides the edit at the bottom)