[flagged]
Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
111–120 of 468 posts
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#112NY Times is about as fake as you could possibly pay for.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#113A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
It's better following individual journalists via twitter or whatever instead of the organization itself for quality content for subjects you like to read about. Personally, I use the main site just to scan headlines and see if there's anything interesting. Everyone's biased, but I don't think I'm more of an objective thinker than a trained journalist who's taken classes to study it and write about it specifically. I…
Maybe journalists should go out on their own via Patreon etc.?
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#114During the 2016 election the NY Times was harping on Clinton's e-mails daily yet completely neglecting the growing evidence of Trump's Russian collusion. I think they are part of the problem.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#115I can't help but drawing a parallel between the news industry and software industry here. People hate paying for software for a reason; an expensive solution is not necessarily better, and there are tons of unscrupulous business practices in the software industry. Furthermore, most people can't discern quality software and bad software (especially when it comes to invisible elements like reliability and security). The same goes for news organizations. We (at least some of us) don't know what's quality journalism, and even in a reputable news organization there's some shady part. We've lost faith to them and thought that we deserve something better. I don't know. I'm paying for NYT for now as well as paying for crappy software that I sometimes use grudgingly. Maybe it's an age thing, but I can't go radical and dump everything just yet. I feel that our new system (whatever it will be) isn't going to be drastically better than the current ones.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#116A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
NYT's feature stories often seamlessly weave in certain choices of words that reflect the author's personal bias/ignorance. It's like enjoying a decent dessert then suddenly chewing on a piece of fingernail in it. Even WSJ doesn't really have this problem.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#117Journalists and news agencies begging for money, telling us how much we need them. I guess now the shoe is on the other foot things look a bit different. As they said to coal miners, your industry is a dinosaur, it's time to try something new. #learn2code
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's better following individual journalists via twitter or whatever instead of the organization itself for quality content for subjects you like to read about. Personally, I use the main site just to scan headlines and see if there's anything interesting. Everyone's biased, but I don't think I'm more of an objective thinker than a trained journalist who's taken classes to study it and write about it specifically. I…
Maybe journalists should go out on their own via Patreon etc.?
I'm a fan of this idea. I've seen many a brand diluted after key journos leave and are replaced essentially by clickbait artists. The problem then is that it's tacit admission that the idea of branding in journalism is prima facie useless, but that feels somewhat natural. A large corporate publication is a large corporation first and foremost -- if it can't effectively create a product, then maybe I don't want that product from that large corporation.
But, where I get worried is what happens to the public commons when the labor of large scale journalism which is out of the reach of a single journalist (or even a small confederation) resources wise gets lost. Would it be replaced by individuals or small federations that are as effective? I mean, I don't think effective journalism will die anytime soon on the whole. But, I wonder if pockets will go extinct, and I'm nervous about what that means. I still don't think I've really seen it all that much yet.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#119A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
> For all these reasons, I have got rid of my NYT & WaPo subscription to FT now and I can't be happier. I think you have a typo. Are you saying that you switched to FT (Financial Times), or that you got rid of the FT as well? Anyway, if you are a US-based reader, one way to avoid some of the bias and noise is to subscribe to a non-US paper. You don't have reporters and columnists trying to sway voters, because that's…
Sadly non-US sources incur the bias of however said source feels about the US. I've seen the BBC home page highlight more random shootings than the actual US mainstream media. And in my experience they'll keep them on the front page longer than CNN when reporting on the same one. It could just be the page I'm being presented via cookie-stored history or whatever, but that seems unlikely as I hardly ever click on said stories.
Unfortunately it seems the only way to effectively reduce bias is to go straight to the primary source and judge for yourself, which is time-consuming.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#120A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
> For all these reasons, I have got rid of my NYT & WaPo subscription to FT now and I can't be happier. I think you have a typo. Are you saying that you switched to FT (Financial Times), or that you got rid of the FT as well? Anyway, if you are a US-based reader, one way to avoid some of the bias and noise is to subscribe to a non-US paper. You don't have reporters and columnists trying to sway voters, because that's…
What non-US paper though? In my experience as an Australian all of our papers are totally fucked. We don't have anything anywhere near as good as NYT or WaPo.