zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. clairi+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-04-15 15:34:34
the same with npr, a crumbling sheen of objectivity thinly veiling increasingly blatant partisanship.

there is value in curation, as demonstrated by subscriptions (or 'donations'), but these outlets have lost sight of that value in the quest to ever-more-desperately shape public opinion while retaining relevance. they've slid down the slippery slope from objective(-ish) curation to the coercive variety and have no one but themselves--principally their wealthy owners/directors/executives but also the rank & file--to blame.

i'd love to pay for objective(-ish) curation, and ideally slower, more considered reporting but that latter bit may be more than is practically possible right now. the paradox of choice makes it really hard to curate your own news feed as substack invites you to do. just like a portfolio of stocks, you won't get great returns on a (likely) highly correlated group of individual newsletters. and without a plethora of them (like 60+), you'd likely fail to garner enough breadth to even have a chance of avoiding false correlation, much like how the nyt and npr (and fox) fail via partisanship bias.

replies(2): >>unicor+QH >>schwax+9T
2. unicor+QH[view] [source] 2021-04-15 18:33:31
>>clairi+(OP)
The problem articulated by Antonio Garcia-Martinez:

> The customer always gets what they want: In the case of an ads-driven business model where the advertiser is the true customer, that’s balanced political news alongside frivolous lifestyle stories as a canvas for ads. In the case of subscribers, it’s being flattered by having their own worldviews echoed back at themselves in more articulate form. Nobody actually pays for news, unless your livelihood depends on it, which is why outlets like The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg will still flourish, but nothing vaguely resembling news will otherwise remain in a subscription-driven world.

Source: https://www.thepullrequest.com/p/twilight-of-the-media-elite...

replies(1): >>clairi+UT
3. schwax+9T[view] [source] 2021-04-15 19:33:35
>>clairi+(OP)
On the topic of objective curation, I've been appreciating The New Paper [1] enough that I started paying when they went subscription-only.

Top five or so stories of the day with a few lines of detail so you can understand what happened and why it's important, focusing on the actual events, not the narratives around them.

[1] https://thenewpaper.co/

◧◩
4. clairi+UT[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-04-15 19:36:25
>>unicor+QH
that's a decent and succinct summary of the situation, and perhaps why the hybrid funding model of subscriptions, ads, and classifieds balanced out to objective-ish news for the few decades before the internet flattened out the business model entirely.

the news industry is roughly $100B in the US (depending on how you define it). as a thought experiment, maybe we could give each of our 330M residents $300/year (~10% of the military budget) to spend on any news source, and only news sources, and preclude other forms of revenue for the industry. that'd make journalism directly accountable to the entirety of the population rather than just to moneyed interests.

[go to top]