A lot of comments here suggest that journalists and newspapers are only out to make what sells. That rings false to me in absolute terms. If you read Liars Poker by Michael Lewis you know he was employed at a brokerage and could have stuck around if he was only looking out for money. Does no one else here believe there are journalists who have forsaken the path of making big bucks in other fields to do the right thing?
It feels like there is a broad brush painting over this entire discussion. I can't say Ray Dalio makes a convincing case for himself here.
> Former newspaper editor and publisher here. The quickest way to lose your faith in the media is to have them cover something you actually know about.
Personal experience of mine was in my much younger days (early 90's and the Tory govt was pushing the 'criminal justice bill) when a rave in a field I was at was raided by 200+ police in full riot gear. They launched an unprovoked attack, beating the shit out of those they got their battons on.
The BBC had Cameras there and on the news that night edited to look like the kids were attacking the police. Never forgotten that, or how the BBC propagandised for the govt.
There have been numerous other examples in my tech & finance careers since then. When I see news, my first thought is what is the agenda of the the author (s) and am never surprised when the real.agenda appears later on.
I saw first hand how the "truth" was manipulated by tech jounralists to create a narrative that they wanted. They included certain things, and omitted others, to make sure that the overarching story they wanted to tell was consistent with their world view. They were searching for the truth, they were trying to make a name for themselves, and then leveraging that for a book deal.
It feels like there is a broad brush painting over this entire discussion. I can't say Ray Dalio makes a convincing case for himself here.