16 ms·

The problem is that the content that's "free and free of advertising" probably won't be very good, or very well researched, or independent. High quality conten

by scholia 11y ago

The problem is that the content that's "free and free of advertising" probably won't be very good, or very well researched, or independent. High quality content often depends on access (which can be hard or impossible to get even if you're a real journalist), a lot of time, and quite a lot of input from support staff (editors, subeditors, researchers, picture editors etc). > So now the question is do enough people actually put enough value on real news to employ journalists to do their work. Right now it looks bleak. Agreed.

Godel_unicode 11y ago
If by content you mean specifically news and product reviews, that's certainly possible. If by content you mean "long-form writing on a specific subject", then you're quite wrong and the parent is right. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/ http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/ High quality content comes from two sources, similar to high quality software. It either comes from an organization which makes and sells high quality content to make money (the new York times::Microsoft) or it comes from individual contributors who create it out of passion for the subject (wikipedia::FSF)
- scholia 11y ago
  People will produce "long-form writing on a specific subject" but usually only if they have an axe to grind. They are not necessarily independent and their work is not necessarily subject to the editorial checks and balances that you get from a properly set up news organisation like, for example, the New York Times. You're moving from a situation where stuff is mostly trustworthy to mostly untrustworthy. Free software is not a good analogy. It works regardless of the social and political opinions of the people who write it. I don't think it would have as many users if this were not the case ;-)
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Free software is not a good analogy. It works regardless of the social and political opinions of the people who write it. This is completely false: every act of writing or releasing Free software is a political act. That's the point of doing it, of giving your labour away. Free software only exists because of the social and political opinions of its authors.
    - slackstation 11y ago
      "Everything is political" is fine in theory but, the reality is that Rails or Node.js or Bash or Linux works equally well for dictatorship filtering the internet and the dissident speaking out despite it. Software is a tool. The idea that hammer is imbued with the political views of the person who crafted it is a bit of romantic mysticism. The political actor is the person using the software. To put it another way, if my software cared what my political opinions were, it wouldn't be used. One of the greatest freedoms afforded me by Free Software is freedom from others' political opinions on how to use said software.
CM30 11y ago
I'll contest this point. There are tons of online sites and resources that provide high quality content for free out of their users' passion for the subject rather than a financial motive. Heck, in the technology and gaming worlds, arguably ALL the decent quality content is like this. I mean, if you want tech information, do you go to sites run by large media companies like Wired or the likes, or read content on a site like Hacker News or Stack Exchange or someone's personal blog (or a topical site like CSS Tricks and Smashing Magazine)? And it's even more clear in the gaming world, where stuff like Kotaku or IGN is basically just clickbait whereas all the interesting stuff is on Youtube or Reddit or internet forums or fan sites or specific blogs and wikis. Heck, in the latter, the commercial media going away would probably make for better journalism in general, since the smaller sites aren't scared of negative attention.
- scholia 11y ago
  Good luck finding high quality content on YouTube or Reddit, because roughly 99.9% of it is garbage. It would take a full-time staff the size of the New York Times, and with a similar level of research and linguistic expertise, to winnow the crap and convert it into something a normal person might care about. Hacker News or Stack Exchange are better quality but the useful information content is still quite low, and it's the sort of stuff that appeals mainly to a small and rather expert audience. Indeed, that applies to Wired as well. Do you really think combing Reddit for info is a substitute for the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal etc?
  - CM30 11y ago
    Depends what kind of info you're looking for. Are you looking for information on the current middle east geopolitical situation? Then not really. Same deal if you're looking for some sort of longform investigative journalism like the recent one about one of the Truecrypt founders. But if you're a web developer or programmer looking for information about the latest Javascript frameworks or what not, then yes. You're going to find better information in blogs and on social sites that on a mainstream news site or publication, because the former cares about the specific subject and the latter has to try and cover a wide range of things to less of a degree. And in gaming... well, the 'professional' journalism is terrible quality to begin with. The only sites that cover anything remotely interesting are fan or volunteer run, and the most interesting sources for gaming related media are indeed social media sites. You're not gonna find anything as in depth at this on most sites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpk2tdsPh0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpk2tdsPh0A Even for more normal 'news' stuff, there are usually tons of free and fan run alternatives. For example, no one tries to get news about Pokemon from a mainstream source, because they've got other things to focus on and don't know a lot about gaming in general. Instead, they go to one of the many fan run sites, like Bulbanews or Serebii.net. This holds true for most gaming related niches, where there'll be a few sites that provide it directly (hours ahead of the mainstream media) then a flood of copycats a bit later. But it all depends. It's not a substitute for 'professional' media for certain, rather more serious subjects no. But for tech, gaming, entertainment or other such subjects, the free news sites are perfect for anyone's needs.

by scholia 11y ago

Godel_unicode 11y ago

If by content you mean specifically news and product reviews, that's certainly possible. If by content you mean "long-form writing on a specific subject", then you're quite wrong and the parent is right. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/ http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/ High quality content comes from two sources, similar to high quality software. It either comes from an organization which makes and sells high quality content to make money (the new York times::Microsoft) or it comes from individual contributors who create it out of passion for the subject (wikipedia::FSF)

scholia 11y ago
People will produce "long-form writing on a specific subject" but usually only if they have an axe to grind. They are not necessarily independent and their work is not necessarily subject to the editorial checks and balances that you get from a properly set up news organisation like, for example, the New York Times. You're moving from a situation where stuff is mostly trustworthy to mostly untrustworthy. Free software is not a good analogy. It works regardless of the social and political opinions of the people who write it. I don't think it would have as many users if this were not the case ;-)
- pjc50 11y ago
  Free software is not a good analogy. It works regardless of the social and political opinions of the people who write it. This is completely false: every act of writing or releasing Free software is a political act. That's the point of doing it, of giving your labour away. Free software only exists because of the social and political opinions of its authors.
  - slackstation 11y ago
    "Everything is political" is fine in theory but, the reality is that Rails or Node.js or Bash or Linux works equally well for dictatorship filtering the internet and the dissident speaking out despite it. Software is a tool. The idea that hammer is imbued with the political views of the person who crafted it is a bit of romantic mysticism. The political actor is the person using the software. To put it another way, if my software cared what my political opinions were, it wouldn't be used. One of the greatest freedoms afforded me by Free Software is freedom from others' political opinions on how to use said software.

CM30 11y ago

I'll contest this point. There are tons of online sites and resources that provide high quality content for free out of their users' passion for the subject rather than a financial motive. Heck, in the technology and gaming worlds, arguably ALL the decent quality content is like this. I mean, if you want tech information, do you go to sites run by large media companies like Wired or the likes, or read content on a site like Hacker News or Stack Exchange or someone's personal blog (or a topical site like CSS Tricks and Smashing Magazine)? And it's even more clear in the gaming world, where stuff like Kotaku or IGN is basically just clickbait whereas all the interesting stuff is on Youtube or Reddit or internet forums or fan sites or specific blogs and wikis. Heck, in the latter, the commercial media going away would probably make for better journalism in general, since the smaller sites aren't scared of negative attention.

scholia 11y ago
Good luck finding high quality content on YouTube or Reddit, because roughly 99.9% of it is garbage. It would take a full-time staff the size of the New York Times, and with a similar level of research and linguistic expertise, to winnow the crap and convert it into something a normal person might care about. Hacker News or Stack Exchange are better quality but the useful information content is still quite low, and it's the sort of stuff that appeals mainly to a small and rather expert audience. Indeed, that applies to Wired as well. Do you really think combing Reddit for info is a substitute for the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal etc?
- CM30 11y ago
  Depends what kind of info you're looking for. Are you looking for information on the current middle east geopolitical situation? Then not really. Same deal if you're looking for some sort of longform investigative journalism like the recent one about one of the Truecrypt founders. But if you're a web developer or programmer looking for information about the latest Javascript frameworks or what not, then yes. You're going to find better information in blogs and on social sites that on a mainstream news site or publication, because the former cares about the specific subject and the latter has to try and cover a wide range of things to less of a degree. And in gaming... well, the 'professional' journalism is terrible quality to begin with. The only sites that cover anything remotely interesting are fan or volunteer run, and the most interesting sources for gaming related media are indeed social media sites. You're not gonna find anything as in depth at this on most sites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpk2tdsPh0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpk2tdsPh0A Even for more normal 'news' stuff, there are usually tons of free and fan run alternatives. For example, no one tries to get news about Pokemon from a mainstream source, because they've got other things to focus on and don't know a lot about gaming in general. Instead, they go to one of the many fan run sites, like Bulbanews or Serebii.net. This holds true for most gaming related niches, where there'll be a few sites that provide it directly (hours ahead of the mainstream media) then a flood of copycats a bit later. But it all depends. It's not a substitute for 'professional' media for certain, rather more serious subjects no. But for tech, gaming, entertainment or other such subjects, the free news sites are perfect for anyone's needs.