[somebodyother]

Wow, this made me realize journalists can really write about anything without being concerned about spreading harmful, false information. I don't get the feeling the author has gained a more responsible approach to writing, just fresher blurbs to put in their health articles.

[breischl]

>>without being concerned about spreading harmful, false information.

So exactly which part do you think is "harmful" and "false"?

[forgottenpass]

Journos are - near universally - holding themselves to lower standards than we expect them to be.

At the more respectable papers and wire services, standards will be OK but with quality lower than someone well informed on the topic would be pleased with. (Time crunch, lack of experience in the topic domain, lack of access, etc)

The largest problem is that they don't correct faulty reader expectations. They're going to write authoritative articles and demand to be taken seriously even if they write for Gawker.

Blogs exist somewhere on a scale between "owned by WaPo" to "basically a tabloid that isn't printed on a broadsheet to tip you off." They generally tell themselves their standards are good enough to call themselves "Journalists" but but have glaring "It's OK if I X" holes where it actually matters for what they cover.