Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 303 posts

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#251

Post by b0tzzzzzzman »

dredmorbius wrote: post #232
rpmisms wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recommend you read some newspaper articles from the 1920s and 1930s. Witty, well-written, and much less discernible spin than current news articles. Journalism has declined as a trade, there is no question. The real issue is whether journalism is net worse for society than it previously was.

Disclaimer: I've not specialised in media history, though I've been exploring it for a few years. You can find clear bias through sources such as I.F. Stone (active 1950s -- 1970s), or George Seldes (1930s -- 1960s, lived to 1995). Earlier muckrakers included Upton Sinclair ( The Jungle and It Can't Happen Here , 1910s -- 1950s), Ida M. Tarbell ( The History of Standard Oil , 1890s -- 1920s), and Lincoln Steffans and…

Wow! Thank you for this well done reply!

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#252

Post by Rapzid »

Mizza wrote: post #115
toomim wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, PBS skews left in the adfontes study, which is the most detailed one I know: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/

Wow, this chart perfectly illustrates my original point. There is a great gaping hole in the upper right of that graph - there is no high-quality, right-skewed news, even though this is where I would assume just over half of the bulk of Americans would actually place their political beliefs. There's nothing of significance in between the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post, after which there is a steep cliff to…

Many possibilities for why this is apparently the case though. Could be a miss-match in who people identity/affiliate themselves with and where they actually land. Lot of talk of the "window" having moved in the passed decade. Possible middle-left bias ate up a bunch of those who would have been middle-right? A lot of moderate right pundits have landed at left biased orgs over the past years. Would be interesting to see what this chart would have looked like 15-20 years ago.

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#253

Post by Bud »

This seems like a great idea. However, I'd argue we do already have one institution that resembles the ideals of a PBS for the Internet: Wikipedia. Is any other institution not driven by a profit motive and also even a tenth as valuable to the public? I'd say not.

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#254

Post by Bud »

mandmandam wrote: post #171
pfraze wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This folds into the general class of calls-to-inaction which they use to pass off systemic problems. "Why are millenials poor and expecting more? Perhaps they were raised wrong by TV. Let's not examine it further." I personally didn't see shots at Mr Rogers get much further than this weak Fox segment among conservatives, for what it's worth.

Fox News ran a hit piece on one of the kindest and most beloved educators in America. It's obvious (to some) that they did this to divert from systemic problems. That's what they do, and they're still allowed to call themselves News. At what point do Americans stand up for a bare minimum level of journalism? And remember, that while Fox might not have gotten far with this particular piece in your experience, they sen…

With the death of the Fairness Doctrine, and its non-applicability to anything other than broadcast media, what mechanisms would you say Americans still have to "stand up" for journalism and to wage war on the evils of Fox News and its brethren?

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#255

Post by jimbokun »

jonas21 wrote: post #88

If you look at the history of the Public Broadcasting Act [1] that established the CPB and eventually PBS, it seems clear that it was passed in response to poorly-funded educational programming not being able to compete with high-budget commercial network TV. Its authors wanted to make it easier for smaller, non-commercial entities to produce and distribute high-quality educational content. In that regard, the Intern…

I think the key is to decouple the discovery mechanism from the profit motive.

Algorithmic advertising driven discovery can incentivize driving people towards radicalization, if that’s what keeps them clicking.

So a system not based on advertising or profit motive could maybe avoid some of those extremes.

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#256

Post by kristopolous »

runbathtime wrote: post #172

PBS should be privately funded.

Then it would respond to and have the same structure as everything else. It's not diversity, it's making everything the same

A rich media landscape is about diversity of structure, not about having a bunch of news brands by the same powerful groups in society that are simply demographically targeted to different consumers.

Diverse structures producing well funded content. That's how you get a rich media

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#257

Post by ewhanley »

Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #207
ewhanley wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am admittedly a big fan of PBS, so maybe I'm blind to it, but I don't see the bias. I can't name a single conservative show, I suppose, but I can't name a single liberal show either. News and televisions don't have to have a political slant. I think we are all (in the US) too accustomed to opinionated news programming and are left searching for the bias when presented with plain information. PBS presents a lot of h…

When half of politics calls something biased against them, but you watch it and think it's fine, you're on the other half of politics. Which is fine, btw. Just worth knowing.

I disagree and this is a condescending response. I know what it means to be objective. Hell, I probably lean right of the median on HN. I’m just presenting the observations of someone who could probably be called radically centrist I guess. I genuinely view PBS as the middle ground between Fox News and MSNBC.

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#258

Post by p1necone »

cabalamat wrote: post #227
dragontamer wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at what is happening today, this call for censorship in the name of combating disinformation has actually had no effect on disinformation. You say that, but ISIS propaganda has been soundly defeated outside of fringe sites like GETTR. And sure, GETTR remains a hotbed of terrible disinformation (such as this ISIS propaganda), but without a mainstream audience, its much less of an issue compared to giving…

> You say that, but ISIS propaganda has been soundly defeated outside of fringe sites like GETTR. Really? It took me approximately 15 seconds to find and red ISIS's magazine Dabiq (and not on GETTR, which I had previously not heard of).

Yes but you had to:

. Know about ISIS

. Know they had a magazine

. Actually want to read it

This is different from ISIS propaganda being algorithmically suggested to you from a seemingly normal website like YouTube without you even seeking it out in the first place because some faceless algorithm values "engagement" over everything else.

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#259

Post by [deleted] »

toomim wrote: post #89
bloaf wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies that looked at bias in the media found PBS to be the most centrist of the major news organizations. People on the extremes of the political spectrum see PBS as biased against them, as they would any centrist organization.

Actually, PBS skews left in the adfontes study, which is the most detailed one I know: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/

[deleted]

Re: The Push for a “PBS for the Internet”

#260

Post by ewhanley »

nobody9999 wrote: post #206
ewhanley wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am admittedly a big fan of PBS, so maybe I'm blind to it, but I don't see the bias. I can't name a single conservative show, I suppose, but I can't name a single liberal show either. News and televisions don't have to have a political slant. I think we are all (in the US) too accustomed to opinionated news programming and are left searching for the bias when presented with plain information. PBS presents a lot of h…

>I can't name a single conservative show, I suppose, Firing Line[0] >but I can't name a single liberal show either. Frontline[1] The thing is that William F. Buckley, Jr. (who originated Firing Line), were he alive today, would be demonized as a RINO and closet socialist by those who claim the mantle of "conservative" today. Mostly because those who claim to be "conservative" aren't. Rather, many (not all) are radica…

Thanks for the references. The latter bit of your response rings true to my experience. I grew up in a conservative rural area, and the mainstream conservative ideas from then are unrecognizable in today’s version of conservatism.
Post reply on HN