Why are journalists the laughing stock or the writing community?

>>8318983
>or
of*

>>8318983
Because they are pawns

>>8318983

>Their writing is the hackiest of hack
>Their writing is transparently controlled by political interests
>They're inhumane ideologues whose sole purpose is to sow discontent
>They behave as though no one realizes this about them
>They're totally absurd in that they seem to believe their profession is respectable and/or important, when almost no one respects them or cares.
>They flood the noosphere with a countless amount of trash daily
>They prostitute the tool of writing for disgusting purposes

But that's not bloggers

>>8319042
10/10

File: 092scheile-family.jpg (116KB, 731x700px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 731x700px

hunter s thompson and gabriel garcia marquez? there are probably innumerable writer/journalists with genuine merit as well. also, journalists are writers. they write. i would even venture to say that a competent journalist has more worth than your average avant garde novelist. are not novelists and poets guided by egotism and political interest? orwell's essay on writing talks about this, though i'm not personally a fan of him. writers who are pretentious, who have loftier ambitions than they can justify are more insufferable imo.

>>8318983
Because they are political equivalent of whores

>>8319769
naw, when the CIA bought the press in Operation Mockingbird, they found out journalists are cheaper than whores.