id like to talk to you about proper journalism discipline.
1. research your target with complete accuracy. take notes. and don't forget the main concept at hand.
2. when writing, remember to leave your biased ideas, questions and opinions at home. neutrality is the game . the only thing that is important is the absolute truth. any biased views of things causes inaccuracy's with your writing, not to mention makes readers believe that what you said was truth when all it was, was personal judgment.
3. back whatever information you have with evidence to support your claims.
4. keep the trash talk outside. being supportive to the readers wins more votes. even if there views are expressed in a negative fashion. sometimes if you read them, you may yourself, become a better writer.
now when we discuss Ms. Neva's own writing, it is none of these. in fact there is a ACTUAL writing style for her form of journalism. it is called. Gonzo journalism
Gonzo journalism is a style of journalism which is written subjectively, often including the reporter as part of the story via a First Person narrative. The style tends to blend factual and fictional elements to emphasize an underlying message and engage the reader. The word Gonzo was first used in 1970 to describe an article by Hunter S, Thompson, who later popularized the style. The term has since been applied to other subjective artistic endeavors.
Gonzo journalism tends to favor style over accuracy and often uses personal experiences and emotions to provide context for the topic or event being covered. It disregards the 'polished' edited product favored by newspaper media and strives for the gritty factor. Use of quotations, sarcasm, humor, exaggeration, and even profanity is common.
people today are gullible and will believe anything that is said in there ears. with this in mind. most people cannot tell the fiction from the non-fiction of Gonzo journalism. causing readers to believe the lies written within. using ones own biased beliefs to become factual.
With reckless abandon, or, more broadly, extreme cases such as Ms Neva's writing, a lack of research is done on the topic at hand. so that readers have to assume that all that she says is truth when anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes Ms. Neva made the whole thing up. when someone confronts her on it. she will respond in 1 of 2 ways. be true to gonzo journalism and use sarcasm, exaggeration and profanity towards the person to make there word inferior. or just simply remove them from the equation either by ban's, deletion of there comments, muteing them or when all else fails, ignoring them completely. of coarse the latter is a natural course of action of someone who learned there literary art in communist Russia when censorship was common practice at the time she got her degree.
does this mean she is a bad writer? no. it just means that reading her articles are only good for a laugh and shouldn't be taken seriously.
