4 ms·

>societal positive externalities This argument walks on a very thin ice. In imaginary world journalists are accurate, and trurhful, and therefore societally po

>societal positive externalities This argument walks on a very thin ice. In imaginary world journalists are accurate, and trurhful, and therefore societally positive, and should be exempted from normal market. In real empirically observed world journalists produce more inaccurate, and biased information then anything else. Also, it seems to be built around logical fallacy that we get news because of media, and if these poor guys will not get more coins we will be left uninformed. In fact, they are serving naturally existing demand (we are social animals) as any usual business does. With the internet competition increased, and this leads smaller profits, and some journalists being laid off. Which is ok. Neither of this creates any real societal dangers in a way which media biz tries to present it.

bosswipe 6y ago
> In real empirically observed world journalists produce more inaccurate, and biased information then anything else. That is just not true. If I go to google news right now the top story is Tiger Woods was in a crash. How is that inaccurate or biased? You're on Hacker News right now because you get some value out of the work of journalists. The exaggerated ideological attack on "the media" is what is inaccurate and biased.
- brokenkebab 6y ago
  Sorry, you cannot take one example to prove me wrong as I didn't make claims about all reporting. Btw, you cannot be sure it's accurate unless it's your field - you may like to google for Knoll's law. I worked in media-related project, and have very clear understanding how things constantly getting warped for clickbaiteness, and to fit main audience tastes. >The ideological exagerated attack You're projecting here. I mentioned no ideological labels, and made no distinction on that grounds. I wrote about business incentives essentially. I'm also not sure if my view that media industry is not exceptional among other industries constitute an "attack" in any reasonable meaning of the word.
  - bosswipe 6y ago
    Weird, I've always heard it called Gell Mann amnesia, not Knoll's law. Anyway, I think it's bullshit. I'm in tech and read tech news and most of the stuff I've read where I had personal experience has been accurate. Journalists generally are just people trying to do their jobs within the constraints they are given. The attacks on the media are ideologically driven by people that want to impose their view of the world on everyone else and don't want journalists ruining that.
    - brokenkebab 6y ago
      >Journalists generally are just people trying to do their jobs within the constraints they are given. And this is exactly what I wrote about. >impose their view of the world on everyone else and don't want journalists ruining that This assumes that journalists are not like us humans, and never want to impose their views. And never work for people who want to impose their views, of course. And their incentives/constraints never push them to publish incorrect, or doctored stuff.

bosswipe 6y ago

> In real empirically observed world journalists produce more inaccurate, and biased information then anything else. That is just not true. If I go to google news right now the top story is Tiger Woods was in a crash. How is that inaccurate or biased? You're on Hacker News right now because you get some value out of the work of journalists. The exaggerated ideological attack on "the media" is what is inaccurate and biased.

brokenkebab 6y ago
Sorry, you cannot take one example to prove me wrong as I didn't make claims about all reporting. Btw, you cannot be sure it's accurate unless it's your field - you may like to google for Knoll's law. I worked in media-related project, and have very clear understanding how things constantly getting warped for clickbaiteness, and to fit main audience tastes. >The ideological exagerated attack You're projecting here. I mentioned no ideological labels, and made no distinction on that grounds. I wrote about business incentives essentially. I'm also not sure if my view that media industry is not exceptional among other industries constitute an "attack" in any reasonable meaning of the word.
- bosswipe 6y ago
  Weird, I've always heard it called Gell Mann amnesia, not Knoll's law. Anyway, I think it's bullshit. I'm in tech and read tech news and most of the stuff I've read where I had personal experience has been accurate. Journalists generally are just people trying to do their jobs within the constraints they are given. The attacks on the media are ideologically driven by people that want to impose their view of the world on everyone else and don't want journalists ruining that.
  - brokenkebab 6y ago
    >Journalists generally are just people trying to do their jobs within the constraints they are given. And this is exactly what I wrote about. >impose their view of the world on everyone else and don't want journalists ruining that This assumes that journalists are not like us humans, and never want to impose their views. And never work for people who want to impose their views, of course. And their incentives/constraints never push them to publish incorrect, or doctored stuff.