Hooked On Vice

Out of context: Reply #27

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 36 Responses
  • ********
    0

    One thing I can't stand about Vice is the way they put themselves (i.e. their brand) into most of their "news" stories. Now, instead of a headline being a quick summary of the story, it's always "We Interviewed ______ About ________."

    Some might argue that in modern journalism we want the writer to be a part of the story, but let's be clear: this is not about the journalist's voice. Rather, it's about Vice, the brand. "We did this", "We spoke with...", etc.

    A basic rule of good journalism is that you don't make the story about your own organization, unless absolutely necessary. It's partially clickbait, and partially a constant reminder that Vice is a brand and you should get behind them.

    For the New York Times, they have a Media desk that will write about the Times' place in the modern world, journalism, etc. This is somewhat different, as it is relative to the state of media.

    But, imagine the headline on the front of New York Times "We Interviewed The Police Chief of the Town Where A Massacre Happened Last Night." UGH.

    http://www.vice.com/en_ca/search…
    ^97,600 results.

    ********
    0Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • If they are funding all of their expeditions themselves, I think it't a good strategy to brand their 'news' stories. Thats what made them successful initially.lambsy
    • ^ Good for business. Sucks for journalism.
      ********
    • Every private news agency in the world "funds" their expeditions themselves.
      ********
    • Their owned by Viacom...they're corporate like all the other outletsAl_dizzle
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread