the problem with this whole line of reasoning is what is really "news". Example: I am happy to just wait for results of Mueller investigation and I have no desire to pay for play by play dribble of leaks that are technically newsworthy but I just don't care about.
Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
361–370 of 468 posts
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that newspapers still make the majority of their income from advertising. This is why ads still appear after you're subscribed and logged in to their websites. Shifting to a subscription-only revenue model is not an easy proposition, and requires a huge adjustment that most newspapers are not yet ready to make. Source: I used to work for a major regional newspaper.
Condé Nast seems to have figured out a workable majority-subscription revenue model. https://www.wsj.com/articles/conde-nast-to-put-all-titles-be... > “The New Yorker, which introduced a metered paywall in late 2014, generated about $115 million in paid-subscription revenue in 2018, up 69% from 2015, people familiar with the matter said. That revenue includes consumers who subscribed to the digital and print editions…
What's it like to try to unsubscribe from the new yorker? Do they still track you digitally and show ads with a sub?
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#363A 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…
That first point sounds a lot like you've conquered the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#364If anyone is interested in ad-free journalism consider thecorrespondent.com. I am not an affiliate, just a customer. I believe it's crucial for journalism to be independent of advertising revenue.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a "strawman". You see this in fake wrestling: a designedly weak contender is set up to get owned by the audience's favorite protagonist
Do they still do that? I thought that was a 90's thing. Also known as a "Squash Match". If pro wrestling can move on from them, maybe news media should too!
Of all my random childhood / young-adulthood interests, I never expected a Hacker News tangent discussing this one.
The role of "jobbers" or "enhancement talent" (i.e. performers on the show whose role was to make the real stars look good) faded in the mid-1980's.
The industry consolidated, from a collection of regional operators focused on live events, to two main companies with national footprints and a focus on television (i.e. WWF and WCW). Competition heated up between the two, and the "squash matches" that had filled out live event cards were not compelling to the newer television audience.
With the dawn of The Attitude Era (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_Era), squash matches became virtually extinct. They had already become more rare in the preceding years. Much of the Attitude Era can be seen as a postmodern deconstruction of the old-school tropes that came before. In this environment, a group of former-"jobbers" even formed an on-screen faction dealing wit the concept (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_J.O.B._Squad), which elevated them to moderate stardom by breaking the fourth wall for an increasingly-informed audience.
Today, some performers will still never have the same potential for stardom as other top performers. But no one is kept on the roster to always lose. It's too boring, and doesn't really work to enhance the winners.
You are correct, of course. The industry changed only because the "mark" fans "smartened up" and demanded it!
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And what makes you so sure that the BBC's handling of those stories isn't the correct one? Your personal bias, of course. Well, actual verified accounts and statistics for one. BBC loves nothing more than highlighting USA shootings - despite near historic record lows of gun violence and definitely lows of gun ownership to crime ratios. BBC does this because they want to “prove” how much better they are not being all…
You make a quick slight-of-hand in this comment. You start off talking about how gun violence, as a whole, is at low historic levels. Then, you go on to talk specifically about school shootings. As far as I can tell, school shootings are at historically high levels. It seems legitimate to report on that considering schools are places that parents send their kids every day and have historically viewed them as safe. Ad…
>As far as I can tell, school shootings are at historically high levels.
And you are also wrong about that. [0] My comment wasn’t about number of school shooting - but narrative. You don’t hear about them unless they fall into a given narrative. You don’t question what you are seeing at all, just happily accept it because it fits your bias.
[0] https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/02/26/schools-are-still-o...
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
that arguably is another form of political bias - if I want to push position A, I will choose the most ridiculous and deranged proponent of position B to imply that "all rational people choose position A". Like on the issue of climate change - there's clearly some fraction of people who choose to deny it completely, but the more meaningful debate at this point is around how much we can do to prevent it, and what appr…
It's a "strawman". You see this in fake wrestling: a designedly weak contender is set up to get owned by the audience's favorite protagonist
In this case climate change denial and conspiracy theories are a mainstream opposition.
>"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." -President of the United States
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/26589529219124838...
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would appreciate less emphasis on pretending to cover news from several angles. By doing so they imply that both sides are equally valid even when they're not. For instance I've seen them bring on a climate change denier to give the "other side" on a climate change story; anti vaxxers, et cetera. It's particularly bad when one side is willing to lie.
that arguably is another form of political bias - if I want to push position A, I will choose the most ridiculous and deranged proponent of position B to imply that "all rational people choose position A". Like on the issue of climate change - there's clearly some fraction of people who choose to deny it completely, but the more meaningful debate at this point is around how much we can do to prevent it, and what appr…
> Presenting a climate scientist who advocates a move to solar panels against a conspiracy theorist who thinks climate change is an invention of the new world order to seize control of the manufacturing industry is not a balanced presentation of the available angles.
Remove the deliberately goofy language you've used ("conspiracy theorist," "new world order") and just say "someone who believes the danger of climate change is not real and is a lie perpetrated by the political left." When you've done that, you have a rather mainstream conservative American position.
What you see as deliberately manufactured, idiotic strawmen are sometimes just idiots.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here are the Trump-related headlines on CNN right now: Trump says he's on same page as intel chiefs after insulting them Erin Burnett: Tapes don't lie, but Trump ... Even some Republicans balk as Trump targets US spy chiefs None of those would violate your criteria, but any reasonable person would say they are negative. At some point you just have to accept reality and stop expecting news outlets to bend over backwar…
Those headlines are very biased in my opinion, in a subtle way to influence the reader to start each article with a bad view of Trump. >> Trump says he's on same page as intel chiefs after insulting them after "insulting them"? The choices of words here makes us already take a stance even before opening the article. >> Erin Burnett: Tapes don't lie, but Trump ... Seriously? The title already takes a stance on the vie…
He did insult them. That is a fact of the story. What word would you prefer?
It attributes the stance to Erin Burnett, which you said is fine.
Saying "Even" is perfectly justified here. Parties, especially the Republican party, tend to march in lockstep with their president. The fact that GOP members are opposing Trump on this IS the story
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#370People are more willing to pay to have their own views and beliefs confirmed to themselves over factual reporting.