I didn't study journalism (or as those who did say, go to "j-school"), but I like to think myself qualified of critiquing the efforts of those who did as much as the efforts of those who pursued any degree I didn't. This is because I am fairly well experienced in consuming the end result of journalists. Probably reading a newspaper on even an infrequent basis these days makes me an authority and a connoisseur. The amount of news I read online definitely does. The large amount of television news I watch might be a mark against me, but I think I'm still pretty justified in passing judgement on the efforts of reporters of any medium. What I think is that my mother makes for a better journalist than many of them on the strength of her time as a graphic artist. Illustrations for local business advertisements are honest and noble- qualities not guaranteed to be found around the newsroom.
The reason which compelled me to write has to do with the sources journalists employ for their work, not just in print but in all media. I have come to believe that many of them are leaning very heavily on the occult in order to learn the most compelling information that graces their work. It's an unfortunate truth that much of what one would most like to know about a person is deep inside their mind, and the layman has no means of unlocking it. The layman, of course, has not attended journalism school, where they have ways of seeing inside minds, hearts and souls all. I wonder indeed at this gift which allows them to casually report the inner workings of a subject's very cerebrum.