• Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    […] This is, as I said, a full time job for a reason. […]

    I mean, I would say only if one wants to do it continuously — I suppose it depends on how you are defining “full time job” in this context.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Think about it this way, the effort to process the information is some multiplier of the effort it takes to consume the finished piece of information.

      Some info comes in, a journalist of some description processes it into finished, verified news ready for consumption. That effort is some magnitude bigger than just reading the unverified news, and that work is enough to keep a lot of people working full time for the volume of information we all consume each day.

      It’s kind of absurd to break down that statement to this level of detail, but that doesn’t mean it’s not accurate.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        I feel we may be going around in circles with this; I think I’m not describing my interpretation well enough, but I think I understand what you are meaning when you say that journalism is full time — it’s not exactly how I would use the term, but I understand what you are saying. I completely agree with you that the work of a journalist is non-trivial. I also agree with you that a professional journalist deals with large volumes of information, and, to be able to process those large volumes of information, it would generally require one to work full time.