The business press considered in light of the ontological difference

You know how I’ll frequently claim that, for all its obvious drawbacks, the business press is more reliable than the mainstream media? Here’s a good example — a Business Week cover article entitled, “It’s Global Warming, Stupid.”

It is almost literally impossible to imagine, for example, a New York Times Sunday Magazine cover article with the same “one-sided” approach. And that’s because the mainstream media exists in order to pander to as many people’s prejudices as possible, while the business press is actually making an effort to deliver some kind of usable information.

The business press is, of course, ontologically awful. Their answer to the perennial question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” is simple and direct: in order to provide income to financial asset-holders. Ontically, however, they can be useful.

3 thoughts on “The business press considered in light of the ontological difference

  1. This all supports the notion that I really wish everybody was unilaterally governed by economic self-interest, it’d be so much easier to tease out data and make actionable predictions that way.

Comments are closed.