3 ms·

It is not the journalists that are dying, but the system that supported their work. Journalism takes a lot of resources. If you starve it of it, you kill it's

by smoe 6y ago

It is not the journalists that are dying, but the system that supported their work. Journalism takes a lot of resources. If you starve it of it, you kill it's integrity and end up with a least effort / highest impact product. Firing the fact checkers, because in "digital" you can fix stuff after publishing; reduce correspondents networks because you can now just copy stuff from some random person on Twitter that is supposedly there; offer people money to send in pictures of events so you don't have to pay a photographer/agency; maximizing reuse of content; hire journalists based on their klout score to increase reach; racing which outlet is the first to send the push notification and follow up story after an event, etc. Independent journalists on blogs or Youtube, no matter how well their intentions, can not easily replace it. You don't have a legal department backing you up for critical stories; extensive network of sources and experts; you can't work extended periods of time on a single story because the algorithm overlords demand high frequency short form content. So they often end up doing not much more than summarizing what others have written. Which is valuable, but it is not where the heavy lifting is done. I do hope, new, better forms of journalism evolve from it, but I'm a bit skeptical, given that so far it seems, that to be successful monetarily, the key ingredients are being loud, controversial and highly opinionated.

throwaway894345 6y ago
I agree with most of this. “Journalists (of integrity) are dying out” is a simplification. To your point, the whole of journalism is changing—as you mention, fact checkers are being fired and so on, but to my point, newsrooms are hiring and promoting the journalists (and editors, etc) who show a penchant for sensationalism and/or partisanship because that’s the new business model. And the journalists with integrity are increasingly relegated toward obscurity (although of course there are exceptions who prove the rule). That’s the sense in which I meant “journalists with integrity/bravery are a dying breed”. I also agree that Substack isn’t going to reinvent the Walter Cronkite era of journalism overnight if ever. Replacing sickly institutions (which evolved over many centuries) is hard, especially when those institutions’ illness is derived at least in part from the same cultural pathogens that the new platform is likewise subject to. On the other hand, it feels necessary to at least try something different than the mainstream toxicity. I doubt Substack will be the answer, but I think it could either be a first step toward a new media landscape or perhaps the threat that causes the established media to shape up.

by smoe 6y ago

throwaway894345 6y ago

I agree with most of this. “Journalists (of integrity) are dying out” is a simplification. To your point, the whole of journalism is changing—as you mention, fact checkers are being fired and so on, but to my point, newsrooms are hiring and promoting the journalists (and editors, etc) who show a penchant for sensationalism and/or partisanship because that’s the new business model. And the journalists with integrity are increasingly relegated toward obscurity (although of course there are exceptions who prove the rule). That’s the sense in which I meant “journalists with integrity/bravery are a dying breed”. I also agree that Substack isn’t going to reinvent the Walter Cronkite era of journalism overnight if ever. Replacing sickly institutions (which evolved over many centuries) is hard, especially when those institutions’ illness is derived at least in part from the same cultural pathogens that the new platform is likewise subject to. On the other hand, it feels necessary to at least try something different than the mainstream toxicity. I doubt Substack will be the answer, but I think it could either be a first step toward a new media landscape or perhaps the threat that causes the established media to shape up.