11 ms·

The absence of ads is necessary for the independence, but is absolutely not a proof of that independence :) Edit: I am an avid reader of Mediapart and Le Canar

by Manozco 10y ago

The absence of ads is necessary for the independence, but is absolutely not a proof of that independence :) Edit: I am an avid reader of Mediapart and Le Canard enchaine, so I know about their independence :)

riffraff 10y ago
I don't think it is necessary either. Do you feel a news site using AdSense can't be objective when talking about Google, or the products that appear in the ads?
- invaliduser 10y ago
  Imagine most of your income comes from Adsense, how would you feel about revealing something as disturbing as google involved in a case of corruption in the european parliament? This is just a fictional example, but the point is this is the kind of news they release. Mediapart is not about news on the latest iphone nor your average tabloid, they release news about political corruptions, large companies lobbying, and the like. Not having pressure from any company, or government, or political side is why they have subscribers (myself included, fwiw, disclaimer here).
  - chandler 10y ago
    >> Imagine most of your income comes from Adsense, how would you feel about revealing something as disturbing as google involved in a case of corruption in the european parliament? This wouldn't happen because a news org would never recover the cost of an actual investigation from AdSense impressions. And even if they did, 100+ other websites will just rehash the first paragraph, write a catchier headline, and come out with a positive ROI...and stay in business.
- Manozco 10y ago
  Having google deleting your AdSense account for policy infringement makes you necessary not independent In my opinion
- EvilTerran 10y ago
  I agree - I'd cite the example of the UK magazine Private Eye. For instance, they've run several articles recently criticising the proposed expansion of London Heathrow airport, despite every issue of late featuring a full-page ad propagandising in favour of it. The lobbyists are no doubt paying a pretty penny for that ad campaign, but there's no sign that's affected the Eye's independence at all. And that's just one example - they've reliably shown themselves happy to bite the hand that feeds.
  - mercurial 10y ago
    This might be in this particular case, but in a climate where newspapers are struggling, it's not difficult to imagine that journalists would be reluctant to investigate the group owning the paper or one of its main advertisers.
Iv 10y ago
They have a history of strong independence, are self-owned, do not accept sponsors. They have revealed several scandals, from both left-wing and right-wing parties. Mediapart (only online) and Le Canard Enchaîné (only on paper) are probably the french newspapers with the most independence from business and the government.
- oelmekki 10y ago
  This. To provide context, we have a problem in France (I suppose we're not alone in that) with super rich people buying most press channels, to the point where we can't trust them anymore to do proper investigation job (when people wonder "why do billionaires buy press?", the usual answer is "to have leverage with politicians"). Mediapart is a symbol of fighting this trend, here.
  - sandworm101 10y ago
    I suspect that is changing. Rather than threaten individual politicians, I think they now use their media outlets to directly alter the public narative irrespective of politicians.
- agumonkey 10y ago
  The thing is to evaluate the size of this "most". Sure, the others are biased, even pressured by powers, but how close to zero are mediapart and the likes ?
  - mti 10y ago
    The claim was that they are independent, in the sense that they do not depend on monied interests for their financial survival, and have a real commitment to investigative journalism. I think even their opponents will acknowledge that they won't shy away from running a damaging story on anyone regardless of which "team" they belong to. (Disclaimer: also a subscriber here). On the other hand, what they are not is "unbiased" or "neutral". They are quite vocal about their political views. On most issues their stance is usually around the leftmost end of the French MSM Overton window, if that means anything. I happen to disagree with quite a few of these views, but I have a lot of respect both for their journalistic integrity and for the role they play within the French media.

by Manozco 10y ago

riffraff 10y ago

I don't think it is necessary either. Do you feel a news site using AdSense can't be objective when talking about Google, or the products that appear in the ads?

invaliduser 10y ago
Imagine most of your income comes from Adsense, how would you feel about revealing something as disturbing as google involved in a case of corruption in the european parliament? This is just a fictional example, but the point is this is the kind of news they release. Mediapart is not about news on the latest iphone nor your average tabloid, they release news about political corruptions, large companies lobbying, and the like. Not having pressure from any company, or government, or political side is why they have subscribers (myself included, fwiw, disclaimer here).
- chandler 10y ago
  >> Imagine most of your income comes from Adsense, how would you feel about revealing something as disturbing as google involved in a case of corruption in the european parliament? This wouldn't happen because a news org would never recover the cost of an actual investigation from AdSense impressions. And even if they did, 100+ other websites will just rehash the first paragraph, write a catchier headline, and come out with a positive ROI...and stay in business.
Manozco 10y ago
Having google deleting your AdSense account for policy infringement makes you necessary not independent In my opinion
EvilTerran 10y ago
I agree - I'd cite the example of the UK magazine Private Eye. For instance, they've run several articles recently criticising the proposed expansion of London Heathrow airport, despite every issue of late featuring a full-page ad propagandising in favour of it. The lobbyists are no doubt paying a pretty penny for that ad campaign, but there's no sign that's affected the Eye's independence at all. And that's just one example - they've reliably shown themselves happy to bite the hand that feeds.
- mercurial 10y ago
  This might be in this particular case, but in a climate where newspapers are struggling, it's not difficult to imagine that journalists would be reluctant to investigate the group owning the paper or one of its main advertisers.

Iv 10y ago

They have a history of strong independence, are self-owned, do not accept sponsors. They have revealed several scandals, from both left-wing and right-wing parties. Mediapart (only online) and Le Canard Enchaîné (only on paper) are probably the french newspapers with the most independence from business and the government.

oelmekki 10y ago
This. To provide context, we have a problem in France (I suppose we're not alone in that) with super rich people buying most press channels, to the point where we can't trust them anymore to do proper investigation job (when people wonder "why do billionaires buy press?", the usual answer is "to have leverage with politicians"). Mediapart is a symbol of fighting this trend, here.
- sandworm101 10y ago
  I suspect that is changing. Rather than threaten individual politicians, I think they now use their media outlets to directly alter the public narative irrespective of politicians.
agumonkey 10y ago
The thing is to evaluate the size of this "most". Sure, the others are biased, even pressured by powers, but how close to zero are mediapart and the likes ?
- mti 10y ago
  The claim was that they are independent, in the sense that they do not depend on monied interests for their financial survival, and have a real commitment to investigative journalism. I think even their opponents will acknowledge that they won't shy away from running a damaging story on anyone regardless of which "team" they belong to. (Disclaimer: also a subscriber here). On the other hand, what they are not is "unbiased" or "neutral". They are quite vocal about their political views. On most issues their stance is usually around the leftmost end of the French MSM Overton window, if that means anything. I happen to disagree with quite a few of these views, but I have a lot of respect both for their journalistic integrity and for the role they play within the French media.