Post a response:
|
This reminds me of a sarcastic commentary of a BBC article I wrote several years ago. I ultimately scrapped that project because I felt the tone of my initial draft was too negative, but hopefully it is still succinct and entertaining. This is the BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41213657 And this was my draft that I wrote several years ago for a video on it: "Hey folks, finlay here. Today I'd like to make a tutorial for all you aspiring journalists out there for how to polish *your* essay about MAPs and just give it a final touch. So for this tutorial I was thinking about going with you through an article that's quite good but miiiiight just use a little improvement. alright, so right when we look at the title we can already see the expertise this journalist clearly must have. at first glance almost perfect with that doubt implying phrase "who say they don't" , that's awesome, that's nice. but i believe we can do even better, folks, if we put an allegedly in here (change screenshot to altered version with "allegedly") next up we have some monochromatic drawing of a bicycle because bicycles are now map culture. and obviously we don't need to credit the artist because credits are pedophile propaganda so yeah, quite neat, pretty skilled in setting the unbiased mood right there. BUT if we add juuuuussst a bit of desaturated playground photographs and brain scans i do believe we can- (scrolls down and sees brains scans and playgrounds)... oh never mind, we are obviously dealing with a professional here. brain scan images, check! horror movie playground, check! this is the art of journalism, folks. going on we've got some cute little warning sign. and what a great specific content note, saying there'll be "disturbing details" now i know exactly what awaits me, always appreciate it. Now, this is just me giving tips for the really pro journalists out there listening, but if you really wanna achieve new heights of humanizing, unprejudiced journalism you should definitely put scare quotes around your interview partner describing themselves as normal (screenshots underlines in blue or black maybe the "normal") also always point out how the person you're talking with feels so uncomfortable with your interviewing style that they feel the need to insist (underline in screenshot) of being law-abiding. definitely outstanding work as an interviewer here "paedophilia is listed as a "paraphilic disorder" ". so always keep in mind to regularly sprinkle in some inaccuracies because we do love ourselves some nice pathologization "Deciding to lie" never forget the right framing. saying "someone was forced by society to hide their feelings" could end in people thinking about systemic issues so always keep with blaming everything on the individual and you should be good to go "The APA says" if you have a more Christian audience something along the lines of "the bible says" might work as well, but certainly put all the claims of authority on oppressive institutions and never consider the actual groups you're talking about as trustworthy sources "Prof Derek Perkins is a consultant forensic psychologist and has set up treatment programmes for sexual offenders. "It's a recognised mental disorder and it's something that people don't choose to have. It's a condition in the same way that someone might have depression or ADHD." " okay, now here i think the author needs to be careful in not shooting over the goal. asking a random academic *IS* a good choice but you need to make sure to not quote the ones that say too outlandish stuff like we see here. elsewise in the end someone might even doubt that that professor knows what he's talking about "Adam seems likeable on the surface. It would be easy to assume he is merely manipulative, trying to project a nice-guy image. I can't speak to his innermost motivation, but I don't think that's the case. [...]He is invariably polite and keen to highlight his intelligence. [...]But it's clear he is not a naturally confident person" Yeah, and also make sure to mention to your readers how objective you are and how your teleiophilic gaze scans (blend in text: "teleiophilic gaze TM) through your interrogated object for lies, and psychoanalyze like there's no tomorrow "and doesn't find it comfortable speaking to a journalist." i wonder why, but i guess it'll always remain a mystery (blend in thinking emoji) "Was he ever tempted to act on his attraction during puberty?" any excellent journalist knows that asking maps if they've thought about breaking laws and focusing the discussion on how dangerous they think they are is super original and definitely adds to help the audience see them as people instead of fueling fearmongering "And yet when he is asked about the precise nature of his attraction, he starts to become uncomfortable." Which we all know is really strange because people generally really like to talk about the *precise nature* of their attractions when asked by someone they have never met before "He admits" Never stop with that interrogation language "to having "crushes" on young boys [...] Adam explains his "age of attraction"." or with the scare quotes. "By this stage, I had built up a relationship with him." If that's what this journalist calls a relationship, I don't want to know what...nevermind, let's just move on "It's difficult to hear him talking about an attraction for very young children." It's difficult to read your lovely article, ahem "It's hard to avoid being unsettled" Of course those negative reactions would never influence the objectivity of your article. "especially with the qualifiers "much of a sexual way" and "mainly it" [...] he replies that there is obviously "some slight attraction"" scare quotes for the win! yaaayyy... about brain scan image: Ah, here we see an expert on pedophilia in their natural habitat, the ivory tower, clearly identifiable by their mating behavior which consists of trying to impress potential partners by pointing at red spots in brain scan images to show off their lobotomy skills. "it's estimated that between 1% and 5% of men have some form of sexual interest in children." blend in : [citation needed] "There do exist a small number of female sex offenders, but it is unknown how many of them might be genuine paedophiles. Although there clearly are women who molest children, a large proportion do so in conjunction with a male offender." How lovely to speculate about the existence of female MAPs by looking at crime statistics, really humanizing. "Others are also drawn to adults and have "normal" relationships with their peers." every time a journalist forgets to put the word normal in scare quotes when talking about MAPs, a Fox News CEO cries. "What has made him like this?" now an inexperienced writer might analyze if such a questions makes any sense or why it is asked, in the worst case even suggesting queerfeminist theory to deconstruct the notion of people "being made" to have a certain sexuality. But since we're dealing with the Tolkien of journalism here, we avoid those petty considerations and pay attention only to the facts, the figures, the scientific studies and the rational biology. "He looked at MRI scans of paedophiles" an amateur would now question the samples used and methodology applied, but like citations, that would all be pedophile propaganda, of course "The dream is to prevent it before the paedophile is even born." What a neat publicly announced support for eugenics. if someone supports eugenics they clearly must be a remarkable researcher. Some nice sweet eugenics will help you keep your far-right readership interested, but I wonder why not go all in and argue for genocide? So there we have it. An artistic masterpiece in intersectional, liberatory journalism that provides a bold counterivew to the dominant perspective. I couldn't go into all the astonishing details that make this a Pullitzer Prize deserving piece of media, but I hope you took something valuable from it |