4 ms·
I don’t think there’s any change needed. Why prop up the status quo with bureaucracy? Mainstream media was shedding eyes and under scrutiny well before “fake ne
by dev_dull 8y ago
I don’t think there’s any change needed. Why prop up the status quo with bureaucracy? Mainstream media was shedding eyes and under scrutiny well before “fake news”.
Let MSM die its slow death while new and better services make their debut.
- closeparen 8y agoMainstream media had what was called the “Chinese wall” between the ad business and the newsroom. For a sales guy to even speak with an editor would be highly inappropriate. It wasn’t perfect, but exceptions would have at least violated social and professional norms with rank and file journalism school graduates. Alternative media (like what the corpses of the old mainstream press have become) don’t even pretend to have that sort of discipline. Their funding model is to promote an individual, business, or political agenda, straight up. On this one, I mourn the loss of the traditional press.
- WalterGR 8y agoPlease define mainstream media. Are you using it in the right-wing sense of “media that isn’t our personal hagiographers”? > Mainstream media was shedding eyes News has been “shedding” paid subscribers. Shedding eyes? Citation needed. > and under scrutiny By who?