SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A rather limited study by neuroscientist Dr. Tara Swart of brain patterns in 40 volunteer journalist subjects seems to show a prevalence of lack of emotional self-control, as well as lower than average problem-solving skills, among other deficiencies. High blood levels of cortisol were significant.
The headline conclusion reached is that journalists are undoubtedly subject to a range of pressures at work and home, but the meaning and purpose they attribute to their work contributes to helping them remain mentally resilient despite this. Nevertheless, there are areas for improvement, including drinking more water and reducing alcohol and caffeine consumption to increase executive functioning and improve recovery during sleep.
[...] As a group, the journalists also exhibited lower executive functioning scores than the average person, indicating a lower than average ability to regulate emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and think flexibly and creatively. It is likely that the levels of caffeine/alcohol and the lack of water consumed contributed to the low scores recorded for executive functioning because of the severe impact of dehydration on cognitive ability.
Read the study here: TaraSwart.com [PDF]
[ n1: This is not a peer reviewed study. It was launched in association with the London Press Club, and the objective was to determine how journalists can thrive under stress. Tara Swart is a Senior Lecturer at MIT Sloan, she holds a BsC in Biomedical Science and PhD in Neuropharmacology from Kings College London, and a BM BcH in Medicine from Oxford University. ]
(Score: 5, Informative) by Snotnose on Sunday May 21 2017, @12:58AM (13 children)
I find gun control to be the biggest identifier of liberal journalists, even ahead of abortion. Phrases like "automatic rifle", "assault rifle", "AK-47" and such typically mean the person reporting doesn't know squat about guns but they are against them. Especially when they talk about an "automatic pistol", and other squeamish hi-ranking and reality low-ranking phrases.
Google "journalists guide to guns" if you think I'm kidding, that humorous chart sums out 90% of journalist's knowledge of guns.
My ducks are not in a row. I don't know where some of them are, and I'm pretty sure one of them is a turkey.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Sunday May 21 2017, @01:17AM (12 children)
I don't know much about guns. The first result when I searched was:
http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?5589-News-journalists-guide-to-guns [gunsandammo.com]
If I understand that image, it doesn't imply that the AK-47 doesn't exist, only that journalists may misidentify it. Would you have them write "Kalashnikov rifle" instead? Perhaps if journalists weren't drinking so heavily they'd be smarter (as this study shows), less liberal, and learn the difference between an AK-47 and an AK-74!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47 [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-74 [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 21 2017, @01:27AM
https://crzysdrs.sytes.net/dv//victim/48/papa-papa-they-took-away-my-ak-/ [sytes.net]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday May 21 2017, @01:34AM (2 children)
I bet they numbered it like that so they could alternate between quoting/purchase requisitioning/purchase ordering/invoicing for one vs the other, and by the time all was said and done, you'd paid for twice your original order.
(Score: 2, Informative) by butthurt on Sunday May 21 2017, @02:01AM (1 child)
I learned that the numbering of those models coincides with the year of first production: AK-47s were first made in 1947 and AK-74s were first made in 1974--but not all models follow that pattern.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 21 2017, @03:44AM
I always preferred the AK-747, but now I hear that Boeing is not even making them anymore.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday May 21 2017, @01:49AM (2 children)
That's exactly my point. "Journalists" typically call any rifle an AK-47, leveraging the guns ISIS and Al Queda use , along with hundreds of other types militias use.
9 times out of 10 it's either A) an SKS variant (AK single shot), or B) nothing to do with an AK-47.
You want my respect. Go to the gun range. Make friends. Shoot different types of guns. Get lucky, shoot some truly automatic weapons. Reflect that in your reporting.
My ducks are not in a row. I don't know where some of them are, and I'm pretty sure one of them is a turkey.
(Score: 1) by butthurt on Sunday May 21 2017, @02:14AM
Thanks for explaining. When we're familiar with a topic or story, we can easily notice inaccurate reporting about it. That could be further generalised to our observations of other people's work. We're not all excellent.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 21 2017, @02:52AM
Why would anyone want to do this?
Darn ammosexuals! Always going off half-cocked, and looking for multiple orgasms.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Monday May 22 2017, @12:58AM (4 children)
No. AK-47 has an emotional resonance, it's what ISIS and all the other Bad Guys Out There use. If you have an AK-47 you are a Bad Guy. Most people don't know what an SKS is, even though 99.99% of the AK variants sold in the USA are SkS versions.
The difference? AK-47 is fully automatic and a bitch to own. SKS is single shot, and available for $300.
Any journalist that wasn't inclined to think "guns bad, ooga ooga" are going to call an SKS an AK. They will also emphasize the bad guy was firing an automatic rifle, when 99.99% of the time he was firing a semi-automatic rifle. The difference? With an AK hold the trigger back, the gun keeps shooting. With an SKS you have to pull the trigger for every shot. AK-47 cyclic rate is 600 rounds/minute, with a 30 round clip. So figure a couple of seconds before reloading. SKS? I can get off 2-3 shots per second, much lower cyclical rate
My ducks are not in a row. I don't know where some of them are, and I'm pretty sure one of them is a turkey.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday May 22 2017, @02:13AM (2 children)
> [...] 99.99% of the AK variants sold in the USA are SkS versions.
A Web site that seems to be intended for U.S. gun enthusiasts contradicts you:
-- https://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/2015/04/28/ak-vs-sks-which-should-you-buy-why/ [outdoorhub.com]
A commenter responding to the article wrote that "[...] most [gun buyers] cannot get a fully automatic AK. Also, if you took both guns empty, no stripper or banana clips loaded, the SKS can put 100 rounds down range faster." I'm assuming the commenter was writing for a U.S. audience too.
The AK-47 is more popular in the world as a whole:
-- http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/266561468141574815/pdf/wps4202.pdf [worldbank.org]
> With an SKS you have to pull the trigger for every shot.
I had gathered as much.
> [...] I can get off 2-3 shots per second [with an SKS]
...whereas 600 rounds per minute works out to 10 per second. I see that there can be a difference, but I question its significance. Are you thinking of a specific shooting in which the rate of fire was important to understanding the story, but was misreported?
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Monday May 22 2017, @02:33AM (1 child)
Sigh. I'm not even going to go there. You are really saying thousands of people a year are buying fully automatic weapons? More than the number of people buying semi-automatic weapons? Not to mention I'm guessing a full auto AK is $1k+, while an SKS is $300. Not even gonna visit the website you mention, it's so far fetched I can't even.
Yeah, guy with the SKS can put 30 rounds down-range in 3 seconds pulling the trigger 10 times/second, as opposed to the AK guy, who just holds the trigger back. You need to put the beer down and think about what you're saying.
No shit Sherlock. It's reliable, it's cheap ($300 for a fully auto version outside the US), and never needs cleaning. What does that have to do with the availability of them in the US? Unless you're saying it's just as easy to get an AK in Chicago as it is in Istanbul.
To be honest, I'd rather be shot at with a gang-banger with a fully auto AK than anyone else with an SKS. Why? Gang banger runs out of ammo in 2-3 seconds, I can use that time to find him in my sights and shoot him several times. Dude with an SKS? We're in a strategic situation I hope to never find myself in.
My ducks are not in a row. I don't know where some of them are, and I'm pretty sure one of them is a turkey.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday May 22 2017, @03:14AM
> You are really saying thousands of people a year are buying fully automatic weapons?
No, you're inacccurately conflating "AK-47" with "fully automatic weapon." I quoted a U.S. Web page which says that accessories for the AK-47 are more popular (there, I presume) than those for the SKS. I also quoted a commenter there who seemed to be saying that the AK-47s sold in the U.S. are typically not fully automatic.
> Not to mention I'm guessing a full auto AK is $1k+ [...]
You seem to understand that an AK-47 need not be fully automatic, else you wouldn't have used "full auto" as a qualifier. You seem reluctant to acknowledge that a semi-automatic AK-47 exists. Yet you fault journalists for being confused or ignorant.
> Not even gonna visit the website you mention, it's so far fetched I can't even.
That was easy.
> What does that have to do with the availability of them in the US? Unless you're saying it's just as easy to get an AK in Chicago as it is in Istanbul.
What does the availability of AK-47s in the U.S. have to do with the ability of British journalists to deal with stress?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday May 22 2017, @03:31AM
Snotnose gun expert?
No, it is an automatic "assault" rifle. If you cannot use terminology correctly, you can hardly dismiss others who do the same. "Single shot" is a non-reloading firearm, not even by any mechanism. Each round has to be manually fed into a chamber. Do try to "know your guns" on SoylentNews! We have a reputation as ammosexual loonies that we need to work to uphold. Misusing "single shot" for "semi-auto" is probably worse than using "auto" as an abbreviation for the same thing.