6/16 His intellectual spark: the βKuleshov effectβ π₯
Two identical images can be perceived differently depending on what comes before or after them.
A perfect metaphor for bias and diverging interpretations.
6/16 His intellectual spark: the βKuleshov effectβ π₯
Two identical images can be perceived differently depending on what comes before or after them.
A perfect metaphor for bias and diverging interpretations.
7/16 Every reader projects their own beliefs into a story.
Some think Benedetto wasnβt a spy, others are certain he was.
Thatβs what fascinates him: perception is always shared.
8/16 On truth: Arfi cites Hannah Arendt and βfactual truth.β
Facts build a common grammar for society to debate.
Without it, we fall into βpost-truth,β where everything is just opinion.
9/16 The danger?
Losing the boundary between true and false β paving the way for autocrats and fanaticism. Trump, Bolsonaro, OrbΓ‘n, Putinβ¦ but also excesses on the left.
Ignorance is authoritarian powerβs best ally.
10/16 Arfi is critical of the blur between journalism and PR.
PR hides what journalism seeks to reveal.
Yet many journalists now borrow the language of political communication.
11/16 PR teams have huge resources π°, journalistsβ¦ just a notebook.
Unequal fight, but essential.
Solution: solidarity among media outlets, even competitors.
12/16 On sources: talk to everyone, even the worst.
Never blind trust β understand the sourceβs agenda and never become its prisoner.
13/16 If a source lies, the journalist bears responsibility.
Thatβs why verification, cross-checking, and confronting perspectives are essential.
14/16 Ethics: Arfi refuses to publish anything that could endanger someoneβs physical safety.
Example: in 2015, he withheld key details on the Paris attacks so as not to hinder the investigation.
15/16 He calls himself a βdark optimistβ:
β‘οΈ Pessimistic about the state of the world and the fragility of facts
β‘οΈ Optimistic because a new, freer generation of journalists is emerging.
16/16 Conclusion :
Journalism is not here to validate our opinions, but to preserve a shared language based on facts.
Without it, democracy canβt even organise disagreement.