My current stance
Current discussion:
Journalists have large platforms
They often have a story in mind, and are seeking to write it, regardless of whether it's important or not
It is good to be honest with people about what is going on
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ82 | |
| 2 | Ṁ30 | |
| 3 | Ṁ13 | |
| 4 | Ṁ12 | |
| 5 | Ṁ10 |
I think by default, an interview with them should be considered an at least mildly adversarial encounter. Their job is to get clicks/views. Outrage is the most effective tool the media has found for this.
If you misspeak or misunderstand a question (and therefore say something stupid), it is in their better interest to print it. If you have an outrage inducing view, it's in their better interest to print it (out of context).
Journalists serve a quite important role in this world, but their incentives are often significantly misaligned with your goals.
