America’s descent into mass delusion isn’t happenstance. The demise of courageous journalism isn’t a happy accident. Its replacement with engagement-chasing infotainment and propaganda isn’t an error. It’s a global assault on reason and informed consensus, and corporations and authoritarian bullies like Donald Trump are both architects and benefactors. For decades, academics warned anybody who’d listen
I’ve often wondered what can be done about this. It’s accepted that good journalism is expensive- crews need to document, reporters need to travel, interview and investigate, writers have to write and editors need to edit. Nobody works this hard for free.
But now we’re also collectively showing we don’t want to pay for subscriptions, we don’t want to see ads, and we definitely want the fourth column to remain independent from government funding. Effectively there are no revenue streams available that work for these organizations.
Meanwhile AI slop, propagandists and trolls are more than happy to keep publishing because they don’t have the overhead of investment in truth. It seems like the ultimate lose situation and truthful, fact based reporting will eventually die completely.
Funding should be tied to ethical journalism practices. Editorial content clearly separated from news, sourced facts, clear conflict of interest statements, equal time for opposing views, and corrections should be prompt and obvious.
Yeah, it’s not a clear cut policy. It could also force a news org to dig up a crazies that support racial segregation or ethnic cleansing. I would only expect “equal time” to apply to more op-ed type pieces, so someone like Tucker Carlson wouldn’t get an entire hour to himself. Those programs could still exist just not as a community-funded venture.
I have no journalism background so I’m just spitballing.
I’ve wondered the same thing. I never minded ads on news articles as long as they were along the side and out of the way of what I was reading. After they started pushing the ads that spring up in the middle of the text I was reading and click-jacked a few times, I switched over to an ad blocker and never looked back.
Good journalism needs to be monetized in some way, but I’m not adding another monthly subscription for a single news source and I’m not reading articles from a source that prioritizes the ads over their content the way they have been.
I don’t know how we go back from here.
Even on The Left we are full of people who shit on news outlets endlessly and “help” by pulling stuff out of ad walls or to reproduce everywhere.
And the moment they see something they don’t want to? Personal attacks, accusations that journalists are shills, etc. Let alone if a news outlet decides they don’t want to risk persecution when they know nobody has their backs.
This battle is more or less lost. But the only hope is to push back against all the “all of this is just clickbait” stupidity and discourage people from pulling those articles out of the ad and pay walls.
I’ve often wondered what can be done about this. It’s accepted that good journalism is expensive- crews need to document, reporters need to travel, interview and investigate, writers have to write and editors need to edit. Nobody works this hard for free.
But now we’re also collectively showing we don’t want to pay for subscriptions, we don’t want to see ads, and we definitely want the fourth column to remain independent from government funding. Effectively there are no revenue streams available that work for these organizations.
Meanwhile AI slop, propagandists and trolls are more than happy to keep publishing because they don’t have the overhead of investment in truth. It seems like the ultimate lose situation and truthful, fact based reporting will eventually die completely.
I think public funding with independent editorial control is the way to go. It’s not perfect by any means but it’s the best we have.
Funding should be tied to ethical journalism practices. Editorial content clearly separated from news, sourced facts, clear conflict of interest statements, equal time for opposing views, and corrections should be prompt and obvious.
Regarding this you have to be careful to avoid false balance. Someone posted this image recently:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/4f42cdbc-ca5e-4327-9237-3d6278e43dc3.webp
Sometimes one side is not equal to another.
Yeah, it’s not a clear cut policy. It could also force a news org to dig up a crazies that support racial segregation or ethnic cleansing. I would only expect “equal time” to apply to more op-ed type pieces, so someone like Tucker Carlson wouldn’t get an entire hour to himself. Those programs could still exist just not as a community-funded venture.
I have no journalism background so I’m just spitballing.
I’ve wondered the same thing. I never minded ads on news articles as long as they were along the side and out of the way of what I was reading. After they started pushing the ads that spring up in the middle of the text I was reading and click-jacked a few times, I switched over to an ad blocker and never looked back. Good journalism needs to be monetized in some way, but I’m not adding another monthly subscription for a single news source and I’m not reading articles from a source that prioritizes the ads over their content the way they have been. I don’t know how we go back from here.
No. It isn’t.
Even on The Left we are full of people who shit on news outlets endlessly and “help” by pulling stuff out of ad walls or to reproduce everywhere.
And the moment they see something they don’t want to? Personal attacks, accusations that journalists are shills, etc. Let alone if a news outlet decides they don’t want to risk persecution when they know nobody has their backs.
This battle is more or less lost. But the only hope is to push back against all the “all of this is just clickbait” stupidity and discourage people from pulling those articles out of the ad and pay walls.