Thanks for your last paragraph. You apparently have a lot more inside infos then I ever will, and still, you confirm my observation. There is no unbiased reporting. However, I am not willing to compromise on this. If there is no way I can get unbiased infos, I dont want any "journalism" anymore. If it is a lost cause, so be it. And, that is not cynicism, it is plain despair. I just dont want to be lied to, no matter from what side.
I hear you on the despair and hope you can find a way to work through it.
When I felt it more (heh it's definitely not gone) it was out of a feeling of not being able to contribute, or not being able to understand things to the degree that I felt was meaningful and moral. There's so much to do to understand what's going on around us and the lack of available resources is... not great. But so much of it is just a matter of starting to look into something and see where it goes. For me, it was researching parking tickets and towing that got me started after my car was illegally towed. For you, maybe a pot hole destroyed one of your tire and nobody in your area's looked into why pot holes aren't being fixed.
Feel free to email me if you ever want to chat about this more, or if you'd like to brainstorm ways to figure things out. My email isn't hard to find.
I would argue you just reported, in a biased way, about your personal experience overhearing some journalists who were having a casual conversation among themselves, and what this says about all journalism as a result.
There is no biased reporting because there are no unbiased event descriptors. Not video, not photos, not physics papers, not even describing some stuff that happened to you firsthand.
There are few things that are unbiased, least of all language. Even when communicating a straight fact, the words and tone chosen to communicate it have an inherent bias. One can report with glee or hope or skepticism or anger or just about any other emotion, with positive or negative or neutral words, all of which have an inherent bias. To a person who's happy about something, a reporter's skepticism of that same thing is an unmistakable bias. The point is, that doesn't make it bad. Accuracy of reported facts seems to be a stronger indicator of the "lack of bias" that people prefer.
