I’ll provide just a snippet, go to the Baron’s for the full exchange. Very enlightening.
For the past couple of days I’ve been exchanging emails with a British journalist who made the original contact to request an interview with Fjordman. I explained to him that Fjordman is not giving interviews to the media at present, and in the process expressed my less-than-positive opinion of the legacy media.
We continued to correspond through several more emails. This morning he sent me a reasonable and thoughtful series of questions about what we (“we” meaning Fjordman, myself, and presumably other Counterjihad writers in the alternative media) think of various journalism-related issues.
As sometimes happens with email exchanges, his questions gave me the opportunity to express my opinions about topics that I often don’t have time to write about. His questions (shown in italicized block quotes) and my responses are reproduced below. Some of the discussion refers to what was said in earlier emails, but readers will be able to get the gist from the context.
You ask some interesting questions, so I’ll answer them in detail, seriatim.
By “shared preoccupation” I meant an interest in the role of the mainstream, or legacy, media in radicalising, or providing nurture, or provoking people to extreme acts.
No, this is not a preoccupation of ours. It’s hard to explain to someone who works solely or mostly in the “mainstream” media how things are in the “alternative” media, which is where Fjordman and I do all our writing.
Our view of the legacy media might be summed up this way: