15 ms·
You're right that it's not how this works. Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions
by karl11 6y ago
You're right that it's not how this works. Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. And that's not the say they are motivated by greed - even worse, they are often motivated by missionary-like zeal to promote a cause. So of course it would follow that they have no interest in publishing anything disagreeable to their readership.
However, Greenwald's argument definitely should be how it works if a media organization cares about truth and open debate. In this case, it seems very hard to believe that a story -- written by a credible journalist, with a long track record, who literally founded the organization -- was garbage.
I think Glenn hoped to create a media entity that regarded truth as the measure of merit of a story vs. how well it promoted a cause and ads/subscriptions. Now that the experiment has failed so obviously, good for him for moving on.
- jpadkins 6y ago> simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. I don't think this is actually right. I think owners of news media companies want influence more than profit. I don't think Bezos is buying news media for the profits... The influence helps for their other goals.
- jrs235 6y ago>helps for their other goals To profit?
- luckylion 6y agoPower. You can profit from power, but you could also genuinely believe that the world will be a better place if only everyone did what you said. In both cases you need power.
- sbilstein 6y agoTechies, thanks to a bunch of dumb twitter talking heads, seem to think journalists are just rolling in bundles of cash from clicks. They're not. The vast majority of them, even the ones with upwards of 20k twitter followers, barely make any money. Influence is definitely more important to them than cash.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago> seem to think journalists are just rolling in bundles of cash from clicks. in this specific case: he is on a 400K salary living in his walled garden in Brazil.
- nostromo 6y agoThis appears to be correct. Most media outlets now are activists pretending to be journalists, run by businesspeople who care about revenue more than truth.
- pete_aykroyd 6y agoWhich one are they? Activists or business people? Saying that they are both doesn’t hold water.
- nostromo 6y agoThey aren't the same people. The journalists are the activists. The managers and owners are the businesspeople. Their motivations are very different but their incentives are aligned.
- ntsplnkv2 6y agoThis has been true since the advent...I remember reading about the wars between Hamilton and Jefferson in the papers way back during the young years of the US. None of this is new. It's way overamplified now, and everyone cries censorship and fascism when it suits them.
- alchemism 6y agoRemember the Maine!
- specialist 6y agoOur expectations of objectivity (NPOV) is very recent and abnormal. I'd like many many more Clay Shirky style analysis of print, broadcast, and social media, followed by a 100 crazy notions for novel NPOV organizations.
- rat87 6y agoThe Intercept has long been an activist paper. That's why Glenn joined. That doesn't mean they care about revenue over truth though
- watermelonhead 6y agoMedia is completely sold out in the country. A purge is incoming.
- whimsicalism 6y agoWhat is the "real" media in your view?
- watermelonhead 6y agoThere is no real media anymore. Report facts, report views/opinions, that fine.. passing off biased hitjobs as "news" isnt media.
- hajile 6y agoDisagree with the media all you want. Leave your "purge" talk in the garbage where it belongs. This is NOT a place to promote violence.
- greenyoda 6y agoYou have no way of knowing that they had violence in mind. A "purge" of the media could just as easily mean millions of subscribers cancelling their subscriptions, causing the media companies to collapse. From the HN Guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- clint 6y agoSeems like if they only cared about clicks and ads they would've ran the article. From my position, they exercised the bare-minimum duties of any good editor to shut down stories they don't believe meet the standards they set for themselves. And for exercising that duty, they are leaving clicks, ad impressions, and probably a good amount of money on the table.
- meowface 6y agoThey're free to make that choice if that's their true assessment of it. But when Greenwald publishes his piece, if it actually is not in fact a garbage piece, they're going to look extremely bad and biased.
- ciarannolan 6y agoYou would think that if that were the case, he would publish it alongside this letter. Edit; he did: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b...
- meowface 6y agoHe said he'll be publishing it on his blog very soon. He may have submitted an incomplete draft to The Intercept for review, and is still finishing it up.
- ciarannolan 6y agoThat's a good point. I just wish he provided more detail to let people decide for themselves.
- trothamel 6y agoThis proved correct, and he just posted the draft. https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b...
- rat87 6y agoMany media organizations care quite a lot about their reputation as well as their effect on society.They want to report honestly and give an accurate picture of the word. Including Glenns paper, that's why he joined it. Glenn seems to have picked a grudge(against establishment Dems) over commitment to solid truthful reporting
- DevKoala 6y agoThe FBI just confirmed there is an actual investigation which was started in 2019. How is that not worth reporting?
- donohoe 6y ago>> Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories As someone who works in media (not on editorial side but on digital), I can assure you thats you are wrong. Most media orgs have a log of rigor and fact-checking that goes into their stories. The editorial side is typically (not always in some places) shielded from the business pressures (for better and for worse). Its someone else's problem to worry about clicks etc. Greenwald stopped being a credible journalist awhile ago. Just look at what he was pushing these last few weeks. I have a lot of respect for his early work but he went on a weird tangent.
- eric_b 6y agoHe stopped being a credible journalist because he broke ranks and deviated from the liberal orthodoxy?
- Fauntleroy 6y agoAh, there it is. He stopped being a credible journalist because he pushed to publish an article that is not supported by reality.
- StreamBright 6y agoAnd this is proven by the countless won lawsuits against said media organisations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2019_Lincoln_Memorial_confrontation#Defamation_lawsuits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2019_Lincoln_Memorial_...
- Roboprog 6y agoThe mask came off this last year for me. If you look, there is often a lot of video on the ground of these events, so that you can see beyond a single narrative. In the same vein, there is a lot of video of what happened in Kenosha leading up to the shootings.
- gamblor956 6y agoThey didn't win the lawsuits...most of them were dismissed, and in the few that were not they settled for each side paying their own costs. (Most of their targets were publicly traded companies, so those legal settlements would have been disclosed in their SEC filings.)
- jakelazaroff 6y ago> Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. And that's not the say they are motivated by greed - even worse, they are often motivated by missionary-like zeal to promote a cause. Why do you believe Glenn is immune to this interest? The entire point of this is to promote his newsletter. > I think Glenn hoped to create a media entity that regarded truth as the measure of merit of a story vs. how well it promoted a cause and ads/subscriptions. Now that the experiment has failed so obviously, good for him for moving on. How do you know that "truth" is not the measure of merit for this story? You haven't read it; you're simply taking Glenn at his word.
- bJGVygG7MQVF8c 6y ago> Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. Not quite complete. They're also interested in being influential: https://www.revolver.news/2020/10/free-market-vs-marketplace-of-ideas-tucker-carlsons-stratospheric-ratings-teach-us-that-the-media-is-about-influence-not-profit/ https://www.revolver.news/2020/10/free-market-vs-marketplace... A story about the former VP in various pay-to-play schemes, using his son as a cutout. (Not to mention about his son producing copious amounts of kompromat — including extremely illegal activity — for the CCP) would be great for clicks. Yet everyone is hiding the story. Why? journalistic integrity? No, try again...