True, but I believe that the problem that Seth Abramson points out is
that as a consequence of de-funding investigative journalism by the big
mainstream media a gap arises between day-to-day news (& instant
analysis) journalism and historians, who usually come several years
after the events.
Assuming there is any truth in the hoary old cliche that "journalism is the
first rough draft of history"
then how does Abramson’s notion of “curatorial journalism” differ from the role
of historian?
The act he describes of "going beyond a recitation of the facts reliably
sourced, to establis
A little bit too much plug for his book to my taste, which also (as I
read here) carries a whiff of the Latin proverb 'who proves too much
proves nothing', yet good stuff all teh same.
Cheers from the French Himalayas, p+2D!
...
Original to:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/
