When you pull stories from all these different sources to create a full picture of what happened, how do you make sure your own personal bias doesn't influence the story you are telling? I love your work Seth. I think it is very important. Thank you very much. Best $5 a month a I spend, and I am a very poor peasant.
When you pull stories from all these different sources to create a full picture of what happened, how do you make sure your own personal bias doesn't influence the story you are telling? I love your work Seth. I think it is very important. Thank you very much. Best $5 a month a I spend, and I am a very poor peasant.
It is something a curatorial journalist has to be constantly on guard for. The idea is to create a large enough matrix that whatever your biases are, if they're not grounded in the facts you will quickly discover that because you will only find "orphan" articles that don't link up to any others in the narrative—and in curation, you are *most* careful about such articles, and use them only if their background facts match up with the rest of the matrix you have. So *ideally*, the curation is so far-ranging that it effectively makes petty biases and pet theories impossible because they won't be reflected in the reliable major-media investigative journalism that you're using as your sole building blocks.
Thank you for your answer. I have been trying to do what you do for the last few years, but i find myself getting sucked into rabbit holes and I notice I can convince myself of some weird theories. I just don't have the skill set like you do.
When you pull stories from all these different sources to create a full picture of what happened, how do you make sure your own personal bias doesn't influence the story you are telling? I love your work Seth. I think it is very important. Thank you very much. Best $5 a month a I spend, and I am a very poor peasant.
It is something a curatorial journalist has to be constantly on guard for. The idea is to create a large enough matrix that whatever your biases are, if they're not grounded in the facts you will quickly discover that because you will only find "orphan" articles that don't link up to any others in the narrative—and in curation, you are *most* careful about such articles, and use them only if their background facts match up with the rest of the matrix you have. So *ideally*, the curation is so far-ranging that it effectively makes petty biases and pet theories impossible because they won't be reflected in the reliable major-media investigative journalism that you're using as your sole building blocks.
Thank you for your answer. I have been trying to do what you do for the last few years, but i find myself getting sucked into rabbit holes and I notice I can convince myself of some weird theories. I just don't have the skill set like you do.