4 ms·

Just to get a sense for the crowd: am I the only one who doesn't care much about the news industry? Keeping with what's new in society is important insofar as

Just to get a sense for the crowd: am I the only one who doesn't care much about the news industry? Keeping with what's new in society is important insofar as having an informed population is vital for the correct functioning of a democracy. But the "news industry" is 95% gargabe and contributes zero to getting people informed. I firmly believe that if the news industry disappeared tomorrow, we wouldn't be much worse off as a society. That google is a bad player should be dealt with on its own. We shouldn't be using the "news industry" as a justification for breaking google up. EDIT: In fact I had never thought about it, but even as far as keeping people informed, google is better than the "news industry". At least with google I can find links which I use as starting points for reasearching something.

PaulKeeble 6y ago
If much of todays news disappeared I suspect we would be better off as a society. Most of it passes more for propaganda than reporting of noteworthy things that happened. Good news, journalism, we need but it is in ever decreasing supply with the modern clickbait news cycle.
- eitland 6y ago
  I'm afraid that even given how bad the news industry is now, if it disappeared I fear something worse would fill the vacuum. State run broadcasting has always been mandatory around here but at least when there's a number of competitors - even when I don't like any of them particularly much - I can still shop around to see more angles that one or more of them don't want me to see.
  - agustif 6y ago
    When state is also licensing the competitors, as in broadcast tv at least in my country, you don't get much else than an oliglopoly tbh... You're still only seeing the angles the govt permits and sanctions.
- aboringusername 6y ago
  I'm inclined to agree, the primary focus is on numbers and engagement rather than strictly bound truthful reporting. How about websites just serve .txt files with a couple links to donate and publish facts/information. I don't need a 5GB JS-infested "website" to access what amounts to a few KB of the actual information I was looking for. This is something hackernews gets right as far as community engagement goes. Truthfully, you could probably get by just reading wikipedia and utilize the sources. Most news doesn't have have a baring on my life and if it does it'll work its way to me. I suspect those who are happier in life forget all of this and focus on themselves, no news, no machines picking out what content you'll see or read.
  - 52-6F-62 6y ago
    You mean like this? http://lite.cnn.com/en http://lite.cnn.com/en or this? https://text.npr.org https://text.npr.org
syshum 6y ago
I care about NEWS, factual reporting on current event We no longer have a news industry, we have a propaganda industry filled with political commenters and activists not journalists (that is both left and right)
- Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
  facts don't matter, stories sell
  - tumetab1 6y ago
    I would phrase it like but I agree with the conclusion. > Facts matter but stories sell.
- mikro2nd 6y ago
  I'd argue that in actual fact we have an advertising industry. The rest follows from that.
- falcor84 6y ago
  We do still have news agencies like Reuters, I would keep these.
gmac 6y ago
> Keeping with what's new in society is important insofar as having an informed population is vital for the correct functioning of a democracy. I would say this -- the correct functioning of democracy -- is among the most important things there are. So we surely need journalism ('the news industry') to improve, not just go away.
CaptArmchair 6y ago
When it comes to making the news, the undeniable truth is that someone is paying to get it made. If consumers don't pay for the news, others will. Even the news on public broadcasting channels is paid for: through public funding and - ultimately - taxpayer money. It used to be that you would pay to get a newspaper, or you would have a yearly subscription to the newspaper. Add in advertising and newspapers were able to break even. Reach in the analogue world was limited to a local city, region or country. Scaling simply didn't make much sense. Local news was a matter of ensuring that the paper would still be around next year to report on local affairs. And local communities had a stake in ensuring that their paper stayed operational. Then there was the Web. Originally conceived as a way of exchanging research information, the foundational idea was to remove all bars and give open access to whatever is published. The early Web pretty much thrived on this idea up until the dotcom boom when e-commerce started to explode. News outlets enthusiastically joined the fray, publishing articles and content for free. But as internet connectivity became mainstream and penetrated all strata of society, an ever increasing influx of visitors also meant rampant costs and expenses to cater to those ballooning audiences. This happened rapidly. By the time newspapers - or any publisher - started to add paywalls to their content, it was already too late. Others seized the moment, and bigger fish had successfully consolidated the market around their offering, buying and leveraging news outlets and advertising as links in larger chains that drive consumers towards the convenience of online consumerism. You are right, saving the current players that constitute the news industry isn't a justification for breaking up conglomerates that influence the current trend of news making. But creating a more level playing field for new players to entering sustainable and durable news reporting with modern business models, is. While at the same time promoting why consumers should pay for the news they read on line, and making it clear why that's important.
eplanit 6y ago
News Industry == a branch of the Entertainment Industry, so no. Journalism has been subverted by Activism, so we're in a bad state of things. I would love to see a new model take form, one that restores actual journalism. A good business model to sustain is the hard part.
- jjice 6y ago
  It is really interesting how news has shifted to a "cost-per-click" model, and how that has hindered journalism. I'm interested to see how things play out in the next decade, since clickbait style news seems to be the big seller these days.
whiddershins 6y ago
Many said this about the music industry. And much of it went away. I don’t think music did very well as a result. I think everyone forgets that the majority of activity in any industry is likely to be absolute garbage and in need of reform. This does not mean the best next step is to destroy that system wholesale.
- tenebrisalietum 6y ago
  Music is doing great. At no other time in human history has there been more music being created and so easily available. The music industry is not doing great and this is fine. You would say it's definitely terrible if you are a musician clinging to the dying once-prevailing industry models that did not adapt to the Internet. That's your fault (as a musician), though. > the majority of activity in any industry is likely to be absolute garbage and in need of reform. > This does not mean the best next step is to destroy that system wholesale. Kill it and start over. Why is this not a good thing?
NicoJuicy 6y ago
Many news agencies have very good reporting. Not all are run by Robert Murdoch. I would say Google is a very bad actor replacement. A lot of us ( I think) are critical enough to know when news through Google seems to be politically motivated. But many people don't...

PaulKeeble 6y ago

If much of todays news disappeared I suspect we would be better off as a society. Most of it passes more for propaganda than reporting of noteworthy things that happened. Good news, journalism, we need but it is in ever decreasing supply with the modern clickbait news cycle.

eitland 6y ago
I'm afraid that even given how bad the news industry is now, if it disappeared I fear something worse would fill the vacuum. State run broadcasting has always been mandatory around here but at least when there's a number of competitors - even when I don't like any of them particularly much - I can still shop around to see more angles that one or more of them don't want me to see.
- agustif 6y ago
  When state is also licensing the competitors, as in broadcast tv at least in my country, you don't get much else than an oliglopoly tbh... You're still only seeing the angles the govt permits and sanctions.
aboringusername 6y ago
I'm inclined to agree, the primary focus is on numbers and engagement rather than strictly bound truthful reporting. How about websites just serve .txt files with a couple links to donate and publish facts/information. I don't need a 5GB JS-infested "website" to access what amounts to a few KB of the actual information I was looking for. This is something hackernews gets right as far as community engagement goes. Truthfully, you could probably get by just reading wikipedia and utilize the sources. Most news doesn't have have a baring on my life and if it does it'll work its way to me. I suspect those who are happier in life forget all of this and focus on themselves, no news, no machines picking out what content you'll see or read.
- 52-6F-62 6y ago
  You mean like this? http://lite.cnn.com/en http://lite.cnn.com/en or this? https://text.npr.org https://text.npr.org

syshum 6y ago

I care about NEWS, factual reporting on current event We no longer have a news industry, we have a propaganda industry filled with political commenters and activists not journalists (that is both left and right)

Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
facts don't matter, stories sell
- tumetab1 6y ago
  I would phrase it like but I agree with the conclusion. > Facts matter but stories sell.
mikro2nd 6y ago
I'd argue that in actual fact we have an advertising industry. The rest follows from that.
falcor84 6y ago
We do still have news agencies like Reuters, I would keep these.

gmac 6y ago

> Keeping with what's new in society is important insofar as having an informed population is vital for the correct functioning of a democracy. I would say this -- the correct functioning of democracy -- is among the most important things there are. So we surely need journalism ('the news industry') to improve, not just go away.

CaptArmchair 6y ago

When it comes to making the news, the undeniable truth is that someone is paying to get it made. If consumers don't pay for the news, others will. Even the news on public broadcasting channels is paid for: through public funding and - ultimately - taxpayer money. It used to be that you would pay to get a newspaper, or you would have a yearly subscription to the newspaper. Add in advertising and newspapers were able to break even. Reach in the analogue world was limited to a local city, region or country. Scaling simply didn't make much sense. Local news was a matter of ensuring that the paper would still be around next year to report on local affairs. And local communities had a stake in ensuring that their paper stayed operational. Then there was the Web. Originally conceived as a way of exchanging research information, the foundational idea was to remove all bars and give open access to whatever is published. The early Web pretty much thrived on this idea up until the dotcom boom when e-commerce started to explode. News outlets enthusiastically joined the fray, publishing articles and content for free. But as internet connectivity became mainstream and penetrated all strata of society, an ever increasing influx of visitors also meant rampant costs and expenses to cater to those ballooning audiences. This happened rapidly. By the time newspapers - or any publisher - started to add paywalls to their content, it was already too late. Others seized the moment, and bigger fish had successfully consolidated the market around their offering, buying and leveraging news outlets and advertising as links in larger chains that drive consumers towards the convenience of online consumerism. You are right, saving the current players that constitute the news industry isn't a justification for breaking up conglomerates that influence the current trend of news making. But creating a more level playing field for new players to entering sustainable and durable news reporting with modern business models, is. While at the same time promoting why consumers should pay for the news they read on line, and making it clear why that's important.

eplanit 6y ago

News Industry == a branch of the Entertainment Industry, so no. Journalism has been subverted by Activism, so we're in a bad state of things. I would love to see a new model take form, one that restores actual journalism. A good business model to sustain is the hard part.

jjice 6y ago
It is really interesting how news has shifted to a "cost-per-click" model, and how that has hindered journalism. I'm interested to see how things play out in the next decade, since clickbait style news seems to be the big seller these days.

whiddershins 6y ago

Many said this about the music industry. And much of it went away. I don’t think music did very well as a result. I think everyone forgets that the majority of activity in any industry is likely to be absolute garbage and in need of reform. This does not mean the best next step is to destroy that system wholesale.

tenebrisalietum 6y ago
Music is doing great. At no other time in human history has there been more music being created and so easily available. The music industry is not doing great and this is fine. You would say it's definitely terrible if you are a musician clinging to the dying once-prevailing industry models that did not adapt to the Internet. That's your fault (as a musician), though. > the majority of activity in any industry is likely to be absolute garbage and in need of reform. > This does not mean the best next step is to destroy that system wholesale. Kill it and start over. Why is this not a good thing?

NicoJuicy 6y ago

Many news agencies have very good reporting. Not all are run by Robert Murdoch. I would say Google is a very bad actor replacement. A lot of us ( I think) are critical enough to know when news through Google seems to be politically motivated. But many people don't...