I'm not in the media, but what's my opinion compared to about a 1/3 of journalists who interview me telling me, unasked (but sometimes prompted by me mentioning trigger words like "objective" and "both sides") about how they're afraid of the new "newsroom."
My frequent issue now is when a journalist quotes me as an "expert" on _part_ of their story (correctly even) but then completely ignores my "expert opinion" inasmuch as it goes directly against the "advocacy journalism" main point of their story.
Previously my only issue was being misquoted by right-wing rags. It's trickier when I've selectively quoted. Because I'm not being misquoted. But if I'm an "expert," shouldn't my opposition to the main point be noted?
But usually I'm just happy to chat for an hour with a smart reporter. Often they just want to tap my knowledge.
