Read on Twitter
why articles like this are bad journalism and hurt the reputation and enjoyment of every party involved, AKA an analytical breakdown of how to come across as a bitter reporter.
A THREAD
A THREAD
note: this thread is based off of the quoted article, but what i& #39;m talking about almost certainly applies to countless other western articles covering the global expansion of kpop across all fandoms (don& #39;t give clicks, reupload next tweet) https://twitter.com/startelegram/status/1194157531372888065?s=21">https://twitter.com/starteleg...
backup upload of the full article as a pdf bc i don& #39;t trust that they won& #39;t go back and edit and/or delete it https://mega.nz/#!kKwV1aiR!NdPrNhoFGyW3teebYl2RO4LIK3g1kYjCxZIc3VseLOA">https://mega.nz/...
entirely possible no one& #39;s gonna read this thread but i wanna say it anyways
also credit where credit due this thread is inspired by oomf, love u :* https://twitter.com/cupidjkook/status/1194354197212192768?s=21">https://twitter.com/cupidjkoo...
also credit where credit due this thread is inspired by oomf, love u :* https://twitter.com/cupidjkook/status/1194354197212192768?s=21">https://twitter.com/cupidjkoo...
so. elephant in the room: journalists have agendas. publishers have agendas. everyone has an agenda.
whether or not the agenda was intentional, accidental, implicit or stated, it is up to the writer to keep their integrity in check.
it also up to the reader to recognise such cues and call them out if they are feeding harmful ideals and concepts such as sexism, racism etc.
it also up to the reader to recognise such cues and call them out if they are feeding harmful ideals and concepts such as sexism, racism etc.
this guy& #39;s agenda is apparently:
1/ use his personal home pride as an insult point
2/ portray the largely female audience as somewhat mindless and shallow
3/ to frame kpop as "lesser" than other music due to its produced nature and focus on performance package > live vocals
1/ use his personal home pride as an insult point
2/ portray the largely female audience as somewhat mindless and shallow
3/ to frame kpop as "lesser" than other music due to its produced nature and focus on performance package > live vocals
1/ personal pride as an insult:
literally half of the article is writer complaining that superm got the name of the location wrong multiple times, complete with oh so scary edgy statement that he& #39;ll bring it up again if it happens again
literally half of the article is writer complaining that superm got the name of the location wrong multiple times, complete with oh so scary edgy statement that he& #39;ll bring it up again if it happens again
1/ personal pride as an insult:
ok, so they got it wrong.
is it worth pitchforks and torches? no, because it wasn& #39;t intentional nor insulting. he even acknowledges it may have been a translation error but continues to phrase it like it was a concious slight against his city.
ok, so they got it wrong.
is it worth pitchforks and torches? no, because it wasn& #39;t intentional nor insulting. he even acknowledges it may have been a translation error but continues to phrase it like it was a concious slight against his city.
1/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
your audience isn& #39;t here to read about accidental misnamings, they& #39;re here to read about the group& #39;s performance. focus on what people are actually clicking for before you give yourself/your outlet a rep for misleading/uninformative writing.
your audience isn& #39;t here to read about accidental misnamings, they& #39;re here to read about the group& #39;s performance. focus on what people are actually clicking for before you give yourself/your outlet a rep for misleading/uninformative writing.
1/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
it& #39;s unprofessional to ramble on for half the wordcount about something so out-of-frame for the article.
plus the addition of "I& #39;ll make it ugly if they do it again" makes you sound like a nitpicky butthurt man with no better holes to poke.
it& #39;s unprofessional to ramble on for half the wordcount about something so out-of-frame for the article.
plus the addition of "I& #39;ll make it ugly if they do it again" makes you sound like a nitpicky butthurt man with no better holes to poke.
2/ portraying the female audience negatively:
what does it matter if the audience is mostly girls? what are you trying to imply by pointing it out?
because historically whenever it& #39;s pointed out that something is majority female it& #39;s 99% done with ridicule and malicious intent.
what does it matter if the audience is mostly girls? what are you trying to imply by pointing it out?
because historically whenever it& #39;s pointed out that something is majority female it& #39;s 99% done with ridicule and malicious intent.
2/ portraying the female audience negatively:
so you reveal it was majority female audience... and /then/ go on to say that they were either too oblivious to notice the "huge blunder" you were so annoyed over, or they were too braindead to care.
so you reveal it was majority female audience... and /then/ go on to say that they were either too oblivious to notice the "huge blunder" you were so annoyed over, or they were too braindead to care.
2/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
it& #39;s almost 2020 and you& #39;re still trying to frame things that women enjoy as negative - purely because they are enjoyed by women. just because women enjoy it =/= it& #39;s inherently less worthy of enjoyment.
it& #39;s almost 2020 and you& #39;re still trying to frame things that women enjoy as negative - purely because they are enjoyed by women. just because women enjoy it =/= it& #39;s inherently less worthy of enjoyment.
2/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
it& #39;s almost 2020 and you& #39;re still trying frame it as though the audience (coincidentally, largely composed of women) was too dumb or vapid to notice an error that you, on your masculine high horse, took as a personal insult.
it& #39;s almost 2020 and you& #39;re still trying frame it as though the audience (coincidentally, largely composed of women) was too dumb or vapid to notice an error that you, on your masculine high horse, took as a personal insult.
2/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
sexism isn& #39;t cute for you or your media outlet. (it is sexism bc sexism by definition includes negative stereotyping based on gender)
sexism isn& #39;t cute for you or your media outlet. (it is sexism bc sexism by definition includes negative stereotyping based on gender)
3/ kpop is manufactured and that& #39;s "bad":
- condemns lipsyncing, despite the fact that many major pop artists have done it, esp. if choreo is involved
- condescends and erases the idea that the idols could have been singing at all by saying "a valiant job pretending to sing"
- condemns lipsyncing, despite the fact that many major pop artists have done it, esp. if choreo is involved
- condescends and erases the idea that the idols could have been singing at all by saying "a valiant job pretending to sing"
- also refuses to acknowledge choreo as dancing and instead says "frantically moving in sync", delegitimizing their performance value
- says that this dancing-that-isn& #39;t-dancing is "part of the appeal for kpop fans", implying kpop fans don& #39;t know/appreciate good dancing
- says that this dancing-that-isn& #39;t-dancing is "part of the appeal for kpop fans", implying kpop fans don& #39;t know/appreciate good dancing
3/ kpop is manufactured and that& #39;s "bad":
"bc there were no live instruments, the only worthy performer was the person running the soundboard"
is Nicki Minaj suddenly not an artist bc there isn& #39;t a piano on stage? no, bc she doesn& #39;t need one for her type of music.
"bc there were no live instruments, the only worthy performer was the person running the soundboard"
is Nicki Minaj suddenly not an artist bc there isn& #39;t a piano on stage? no, bc she doesn& #39;t need one for her type of music.
3/ kpop is manufactured and that& #39;s "bad":
edgy tongue-in-cheek statement that kpop is "canned music", wrapped up with a pretty compliment about the ~power of music~.
you think other music isn& #39;t also manufactured? tswift/1D/little mix don& #39;t have producers/choreographers/staff?
edgy tongue-in-cheek statement that kpop is "canned music", wrapped up with a pretty compliment about the ~power of music~.
you think other music isn& #39;t also manufactured? tswift/1D/little mix don& #39;t have producers/choreographers/staff?
even if it was "canned", so what? what& #39;s your point?
does canned food stop being food? no.
what does it matter how "manufactured" or "fake" media is if people are enjoying it and it isn& #39;t causing harm?
music doesn& #39;t have to be deep or real to be fun.
does canned food stop being food? no.
what does it matter how "manufactured" or "fake" media is if people are enjoying it and it isn& #39;t causing harm?
music doesn& #39;t have to be deep or real to be fun.
you are not a ~saviour of the people~ for pointing out something is made in an industry based around profit, you are an ass for trying to rain on people& #39;s happiness for no reason.
3/ why it& #39;s bad journalism:
none of these "criticisms" are specific to superm, the topic of the article.
no one came here to read your thinly veiled bones to pick with kpop as a genre, they came to see your review of the superm concert - of which there is maybe 2 1/2 paragraphs.
none of these "criticisms" are specific to superm, the topic of the article.
no one came here to read your thinly veiled bones to pick with kpop as a genre, they came to see your review of the superm concert - of which there is maybe 2 1/2 paragraphs.
CONCLUSION:
next time, write about what was in the title, not personal nitpicks.
next time, don& #39;t alienate your readers (majority female audience you insulted? oh yeah, also your target audience for this article.)
next time, write about what was in the title, not personal nitpicks.
next time, don& #39;t alienate your readers (majority female audience you insulted? oh yeah, also your target audience for this article.)
next time, if you have issues with the topic as a whole, square up and post it as its own article and take the discussion it generates.
next time, be a professional about your job since it reflects on you and your outlet.
next time, be a professional about your job since it reflects on you and your outlet.
