The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism • Hacker News Board

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#171

Post by B1FF_PSUVM » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #116

ralfd wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you never argued with Trumpers on the Internet at election time. The Fake news were widely distributed and very frustrating to argue against! The template is practically a hack of human laziness and selective bias. Example: http://archive.is/9CXYO This archive of a disreputable website has an article that claims Clinton bribed prominent Republicans (which were at that time Trumps opponents in the primary). It…

All the Trump supporters I know seem far more knowledgeable than the Trump opponents, and the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own. (This is almost certainly due to selection bias - Trump hatred is a socially required belief in my circles, while Trump support is a very unusual position adopted only after careful thought and kept carefully hidden.) There are many silly beliefs that Trump opponents ha…

> the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own.

Chiefly that owners have the cattle's best interests in mind and will tell them the truth.

(Actually, they mostly do. The advertisers are mainly very selective about the facts they publish. And the way they wrap them up for delivery. "Never give a sucker an even break" as one famous advertiser candidly put it.)

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#172

Post by ABCLAW » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:33 PM UTC

ForrestN wrote: post #162

ABCLAW wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've performed investigatory work before, you'd know that having a specific incident memorialized in text is often only the visible iceberg of non-compliance. Most agents that are skirting the rules have some notion that they shouldn't be overtly recording their misdeeds. In other words, where there's smoke, there's often fire. The 'one incident' wasn't just smoke, though. It was a full blown conflict-of-interes…

Sure—and I'm not excusing Brazile or the DNC. But that wasn't the parent's point. Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat who was constantly talking about his own disconnection from the Democratic establishment is something that I think is bad for the party and unethical. I don't really like the Democratic establishment very much. Having…

I believe your points were already well addressed, but lets take another stab at this.

A number of studies have indicated that media displayed substantial bias during the primaries. That bias was directly in line with Clinton's campaign strategy, as stated in another child to the parent comment.

https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-presidentia...

I'm not sure what else you're looking for. More on the causation front? Studies on the effects of media coverage on candidates in political races have thoroughly discussed here and elsewhere since the election.

More on the media bias side? I'm sure you can review the DNC leak as well as other post-election frequency reviews.

There's a reason why people were outraged at the media post-election and subsequently why the 'fake news' scapegoat was trotted out as a narrative to salvage the worth of mainstream media's reputation.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#173

Post by spopejoy » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:33 PM UTC

ForrestN wrote: post #162

ABCLAW wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've performed investigatory work before, you'd know that having a specific incident memorialized in text is often only the visible iceberg of non-compliance. Most agents that are skirting the rules have some notion that they shouldn't be overtly recording their misdeeds. In other words, where there's smoke, there's often fire. The 'one incident' wasn't just smoke, though. It was a full blown conflict-of-interes…

Sure—and I'm not excusing Brazile or the DNC. But that wasn't the parent's point. Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat who was constantly talking about his own disconnection from the Democratic establishment is something that I think is bad for the party and unethical. I don't really like the Democratic establishment very much. Having…

I think you're railing too much on the "obvious victor" point, which the OP didn't even say. In fact, given your statement "Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat", you've established the collusion yourself. The press part is their long-standing and equally unsavory relationship with the [DR]NCs to begin with.

Indeed, the burden is on you to show how they ever lifted the tiniest finger to NOT do what we all knew they were up to from the start: coronate Clinton as heir apparent.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#174

Post by spopejoy » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

ForrestN wrote: post #120

I recently saw a very astute analogy between Facebook and cigarette companies. I suspect that in some years there will be testimony about what Facebook knew, and when, with respect to the addictiveness of its product and its links to mental health problems. I'm quite sure they know how harmful their product is and that's probably behind a lot of this absurd "we're going to save the world" rhetoric. This whole fight e…

> Is its responsibility to earn profit in conflict with the interests of its users?

Yes.

I'm amazed honestly that people even read/watch this loser's output. Zuck is the classic example of somebody who got lucky once and now all of us have to put up with his towering mediocrity, forever. No wonder he's looking at national politics, always a last refuge for over-successful lightweights.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#175

Post by B1FF_PSUVM » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:48 PM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #152

cerved wrote: post #70

"One analyst told The New York Times last year that 85 percent of all online advertising revenue is funneled to either Facebook or Google—leaving a paltry 15 percent for news organizations to fight over." I stopped reading here since the author obviously doesn't know what he/she is talking about and didn't bother looking it up.

Closer to 64%. But yes, two thirds of online ads to two entities, neither journalistic. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-22/google-an...

Used to be that advertisers didn't know which 50% of their budget they were wasting. That money paid for interesting writing, some of it even investigative reporting.

Now advertisers can track the last red cent. Thank you, W3C. Well done, even if that wasn't the intention.

(Beware answered prayers, etc., etc.)

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#176

Post by ForrestN » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:56 PM UTC

ABCLAW wrote: post #172

ForrestN wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure—and I'm not excusing Brazile or the DNC. But that wasn't the parent's point. Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat who was constantly talking about his own disconnection from the Democratic establishment is something that I think is bad for the party and unethical. I don't really like the Democratic establishment very much. Having…

I believe your points were already well addressed, but lets take another stab at this. A number of studies have indicated that media displayed substantial bias during the primaries. That bias was directly in line with Clinton's campaign strategy, as stated in another child to the parent comment. https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-presidentia... I'm not sure what else you're looking for. More on the caus…

What? From the summary of your link: "Why was Clinton’s coverage substantially more negative than Sanders’, and why did Sanders get so much less coverage than she did?"

Did I ever claim the media wasn't biased? Of course the media had an effect on the election, and that effect wasn't neutral. The fact that the media has systemic biases does not imply that major media organizations conspired in favor of a candidate, Hillary Clinton, who was actually considered by most to have been negatively impacted in the general election, and according to the link you posted, was covered more negatively than Bernie Sanders.

This is a giant mess conflating DNC problems with fundamental realities of news media with an unproven conspiracy theory. I have always been responding to this: "the corporate media [...] colluded to stop a once in a lifetime opportunity in Bernie Sanders to help their friend and collaborator Hillary Clinton, and so we ended up with Donald Trump." I promise you, that is not the position of the Shorenstein Center or any other academic research organization focused on journalism.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#177

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:59 PM UTC

RyanZAG wrote: post #3

vinhboy wrote: post #2

> It’s also not Zuckerberg’s responsibility to solve a broken business model in journalism. (One could argue he has a moral imperative to do so, given his position of power, but that’s not the same thing.) That line is pretty much all you need to know about the article, despite what the title is claiming. In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact…

> In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. Why is this a problem that needs to be solved though? A big part of being free is being able to choose what you get to care about, being able to choose what you get to read, and being able to have your own opinions. Remove that, and you're no longer free. Would it be better to not be a free p…

People can choose a great many things.

What they cannot choose, however, is what is truth, and what is reality.

Reality has a way of imposing itself. And a disregard for reality on the part of some has a profound way of imposing itself on the many.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#178

Post by ForrestN » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 9:59 PM UTC

spopejoy wrote: post #173

ForrestN wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure—and I'm not excusing Brazile or the DNC. But that wasn't the parent's point. Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat who was constantly talking about his own disconnection from the Democratic establishment is something that I think is bad for the party and unethical. I don't really like the Democratic establishment very much. Having…

I think you're railing too much on the "obvious victor" point, which the OP didn't even say. In fact, given your statement "Longtime establishment Democrat operatives acting on behalf of a longtime establishment Democrat against a non-Democrat", you've established the collusion yourself. The press part is their long-standing and equally unsavory relationship with the [DR]NCs to begin with. Indeed, the burden is on yo…

Again, I'm responding to this statement: "the corporate media [...] colluded to stop a once in a lifetime opportunity in Bernie Sanders to help their friend and collaborator Hillary Clinton, and so we ended up with Donald Trump."

The fact that career democrats feel strongly about the outcome of a democratic primary is not a corporate media conspiracy. Should there be reforms to the Democrats' primary process? Yes. Is that at all relevant to the subject of this part of the thread? No.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#179

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 10:04 PM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #49

aanm1988 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't need these cheap media that just reprint propaganda-style sponsored stories. What's destroying journalism is people like you calling out media as propaganda, fake news, etc...

Well, yes and no. Does the media sometimes present propaganda and fake news as fact? Sure. Not always, but sure, it happens. Calling out specific media outlets when they do this is absolutely necessary. Of course, labeling media as fake news simply because the facts they report disagree with your ideology is dishonest and reprehensible.

Propaganda on the part of a media instution as a whole is manifested by a persistent bias.

Making occasional errors isn't a sign of bias. Correcting those errors is a key part (and running the correction prominantly) of not being biased.

It's been observed that the principle bias of many major commercial media is inherently pro-establishment.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#180

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, Feb 19, 2017, 10:08 PM UTC

cylinder wrote: post #112

StreamBright wrote: post #100

The problem with "journalism" is that it got degraded to infotainment over the last decade and there is barely any real journalism left. If you have to make money, you have to cater to a large group of people and also for your advertisers. This essentially making sure most of your output is clickbait titles and nothing too crazy. There are few exceptions though like the intercept and similar news outlets.

Entertainment is the product. See Neil Postman's Amused to Death. If people really wanted quality journalism, they'd be lining up to pay for it. This is not a market failure.

NB: Amusing Ourselves to Death

https://www.worldcat.org/title/amusing-ourselves-to-death/oc...