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

Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 468 posts

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#31

Post by bayulxc5 »

adamrezich wrote: post #21
aphextron wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do these alt-media companies have accredited journalists, held to objective professional and ethical standards laid out by journalist organizations? Do they cite credible sources and facts with every article? Because that's what we're losing. The idea that JoeBlowKnowsTheTruth.com holds the same level of accountability, rigor, and seriousness as an actual news organization is what's gotten us into this mess.

How did the other response to this comment get [dead] within _one minute_ of being posted?

The account is shadowbanned. (Heads up, loraa!)

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#32

Post by bargl »

I want a service where I can subscribe to journalists not news papers. I want to know that they are getting a portion of my subscription and being successful. I want 0 advertising in this news paper.

Where do I get it? Is this something we need to create? I'd love a fact check o meter on each journalist as well, but I think that'd be very open to bias, so I don't know how that'd happen.

Anyway, I don't subscribe to newspapers because I don't like their model, not because I don't want to support the journalist. I have no clue if I'm missing a massive part of how the newspapers actually front a lot of money to make journalism better by paying expenses for journalists. I'm no expert on the ins and outs of journalism. I just see a lot of crap reporting that doesn't hold water and I'm tired of reading op-ed pieces falsely labeled as journalism.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#33

Post by untog »

prepend wrote: post #23
dawhizkid wrote: post #7

Not sure about anyone else but every time I read an article about something I'm actually an expert in or few times about myself or a company I've worked for I see at least a handful of factual errors and/or exaggerations that aren't real.

I think that’s called the Gell-Mann Effect [0]. I think these articles are pretty comical coming from the New York Times, a for profit company, that has been cutting costs amidst really serious editorial failures. I would believe this much more if it was from an independent news source. It’s like a car salesman telling you great buying a car is. It’s reasonable that the Times would have such a biased, unfounded artic…

In what way is NYT not an independent news source? It's not owned by some giant media conglomerate, it's family owned. And last I checked it was one of few media companies reporting good financial results, not cutting costs.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#34

Post by everdev »

What if we had a way to signify that an article or a publication meets a certain set of journalistic standards (sourcing, fact checking, no opinions, etc.), such that violating those standards would result in a fine.

Then it might be easier for a casual reader to differentiate between journalism and opinion.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#37

Post by ekianjo »

dawhizkid wrote: post #7

Not sure about anyone else but every time I read an article about something I'm actually an expert in or few times about myself or a company I've worked for I see at least a handful of factual errors and/or exaggerations that aren't real.

Yup, most news are either fake news or simply poorly researched/misinterpretated. You cant be in the business of pushing so many stories every single day and pretend that you are covering them properly.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#38

Post by wenc »

pessimizer wrote: post #9

There is no feature of paying for news that makes it more real. The NYT and WaPo should stop mixing news and editorial and relying on "anonymous administration officials" and intelligence agencies; that would set an example to other outlets.

I think any commercial enterprise that thrives on eyeballs will always have a perverse incentive to be "interesting"/sensational to one demographic or another.

This incentive is diminished for news outlets like the BBC, though not completely because they are funded by TV license fees which the British public complain about frequently.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#39

Post by jcroll »

bargl wrote: post #32

I want a service where I can subscribe to journalists not news papers. I want to know that they are getting a portion of my subscription and being successful. I want 0 advertising in this news paper. Where do I get it? Is this something we need to create? I'd love a fact check o meter on each journalist as well, but I think that'd be very open to bias, so I don't know how that'd happen. Anyway, I don't subscribe to n…

Despite not liking their model do you still read their articles?

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#40

Post by borkt »

untog wrote: post #33
prepend wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that’s called the Gell-Mann Effect [0]. I think these articles are pretty comical coming from the New York Times, a for profit company, that has been cutting costs amidst really serious editorial failures. I would believe this much more if it was from an independent news source. It’s like a car salesman telling you great buying a car is. It’s reasonable that the Times would have such a biased, unfounded artic…

In what way is NYT not an independent news source? It's not owned by some giant media conglomerate, it's family owned. And last I checked it was one of few media companies reporting good financial results, not cutting costs.

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-ti...
Post reply on HN