20 ms·
> Many prominent newsrooms seem to regard fact checking as an obstacle to avoid. Or they simply can't afford to employ fact checkers anymore, now that people r
by smacktoward 8y ago
> Many prominent newsrooms seem to regard fact checking as an obstacle to avoid.
Or they simply can't afford to employ fact checkers anymore, now that people refuse to pay for news.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> now that people refuse to pay for news People (the audience, that is) have historically refused to pay a significant share of the cost for news, what has changed is that advertisers have stopped paying as much for news (because the share of people's attention debited to news, and therefore which news outlets have to sell access to, has dropped.) Paid circulation used to often be important not so much because of direct revenue but because advertisers looked to it as an important measure of reach.
- smacktoward 8y agoThat's true as well. The effect is the same either way, though -- news organizations aren't exactly swimming in money these days. They have trouble just paying journalists, much less support staff for those journalists like fact-checkers.
- weberc2 8y agoMaybe that's part of it, but there are plenty of examples of the media deliberately misleading their audience. "Can't afford fact checkers" doesn't really explain that.