Clarisa, thanks so much for the feedback.
Ah, if only you knew how much I toned it down from where I started! When I say I have a deep, long-standing animosity towards this type of article and publication, I
really mean it.
What I have learned about the media (I normally won't even call them reporters or journalists or even "the press"), is that you can accuse them of almost anything, including being unethical and heartless and bottom-feeding parasites, and it doesn't bother them a bit. But they do
not like to be ridiculed as incompetent. Probably because the truth hurts, and they'd prefer to be considered malicious over stupid, lol.
So I'm reading your description of a good investigative journalist and I'm thinking, really? You know a good investigative journalist that is still alive? If so, I'd love to know who. I completely share your attitude toward the so-called "documentaries." I won't watch the Bleeding Edge, because…well, really, why would I waste my time, and also because I'm afraid that then I'd have to write about it, too. Sometimes I can't help myself. It's an exorcism.
But what really kills us is not the incompetent reporter, or the tabloid that publishes the junk they write, but the fact that all the media outlets pick up each other's stories and mindlessly repeat them. And, like any rumor, the more people hear it, they more they think it must be true. (One of my all-time favorite comments in a LinkedIn discussion was "And do we have any evidence to support this, other than a lot of people repeating it over and over on the internet?)
Anyway, I need to stop thinking about this and move on to something more productive. Thanks again for taking the time to give me your reaction. It was a different kind of thing for me to write, so that I wasn't entirely sure I knew what to make of it myself! But "blunt"...yeah, that part I knew, lol.
------------------------------
Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
Principal Consultant
Class Three, LLC
Mebane, North Carolina, USA
919-544-3366 (T)
434-964-1614 (C)
julie@class3devices.com------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 04-Apr-2019 19:50
From: Clarisa Tate
Subject: PLEASE STAND BY TO HELP ME BREAK THE INTERNET
Pretty blunt response there, Julie! But sometimes that's the only way a person can clearly specify that their wanna-be-investigative-journalist writing isn't up to par.
The mistakes made by this writer is why true investigative journalists aren't lazy about handling information. True investigative journalists always question their sources' motivation, data, information, etc., critically analyzing every facet of their sources and the information given. Heck, I don't even think they trust their own eyes when they witness an event unless there is something to corroborate it did happen! They tend to be hard core looking for truth! They are also very careful with their words which this article is not. True investigative journalists fact check and re-check like you wouldn't believe. They also put their emotions (outrage) where it belongs: as a motivating factor to pursue more information, since sometimes exposes can take years in the making. They use their logic to give damning evidence after evidence and supporting documents and critical analysis (which they sometimes ask a trusted honest fellow journalist to tear down if possible to look for holes). In some cases, they let it "simmer" or "cool" so they can look at it again and critique their own investigative results and article in a new light - questioning everything, even themselves. It's very obvious that the publisher here didn't do any of this. It is unfortunate that investigative journalists are becoming a dying breed. More news articles now can pass as blogs, like KHNs, and they seem to be all opinion pieces now, editorials, rather than actual unbiased news.
https://connect.raps.org/communities/community-home/digestviewer/viewthread?GroupId=97&MessageKey=81a21d0f-cccf-44a3-9bfc-a555d2af4804&CommunityKey=5af348a7-851e-4594-b467-d4d0983b6d89&tab=digestviewer&ReturnUrl=%2fcommunities%2fcommunity-home%2fdigestviewer%3fcommunitykey%3d5af348a7-851e-4594-b467-d4d0983b6d89%26tab%3ddigestviewer
FYI, don't even get me started with people in the entertainment industry who make so-called documentaries in our industry...
------------------------------
Clarisa Tate
VP, Product Development and Regulatory Affairs
Medical Devices Professional, RA/QA/Engineering
Bay Area, CA
USA
Original Message:
Sent: 02-Apr-2019 16:20
From: Julie Omohundro
Subject: PLEASE STAND BY TO HELP ME BREAK THE INTERNET
Corey, my internet went down early this am, so I'm a bit out of touch. I (or perhaps I should say the Regulatoty Watchcat) posted it late last night. I later thought I should have put subject line in all caps, but was too brain dead last night and you can't edit subject lines, so nothing to be done about it now. I trust you can find it nonetheless, now that you know it's there.
------------------------------
Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
Principal Consultant
Class Three, LLC
Mebane, North Carolina, USA
919-544-3366 (T)
434-964-1614 (C)
julie@class3devices.com
Original Message:
Sent: 02-Apr-2019 15:56
From: Corey Jaseph
Subject: PLEASE STAND BY TO HELP ME BREAK THE INTERNET
I look forward to seeing your response! Please give a heads up when it's public.
------------------------------
Corey Jaseph RAC
Director of Regulatory Affairs
South Jordan UT
United States
Original Message:
Sent: 31-Mar-2019 22:24
From: Julie Omohundro
Subject: PLEASE STAND BY TO HELP ME BREAK THE INTERNET
------------------------------
Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
Principal Consultant
Class Three, LLC
Mebane, North Carolina, USA
919-544-3366 (T)
434-964-1614 (C)
julie@class3devices.com
------------------------------