10 ms·
It's interesting to me because the original subscription model of newspapers was built to counter the perceived low information quality that came from an era wh
by CSMastermind 4y ago
It's interesting to me because the original subscription model of newspapers was built to counter the perceived low information quality that came from an era where papers were based entirely on sales and ad revenue (leading to the original 'clickbait' headlines).
It seems like the internet, powered by advertising, brought the 'attention' economy roaring back. In its wake news organizations and their hard-won subscriber bases were eroded.
Now we seemed poised to relearn the same lessons about what happens when your incentives are not for truth and accuracy but rather attention.
- zwkrt 4y agoBefore that though there were interest based papers and local news that was hard hitting and relevant, union papers, private investigation, and generally a high interest in journalism that was worth a damn. As the internet has evolved inexorably to take advantage of our psychology, I don't think we are going back.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- mattbuilds 4y agoSorry to hijack your comment and kind of unrelated, but does anyone have any books that discuss the beginning of mass media/newspapers. Your comment about the internet brining back the “attention” economy has me interested in the origins of mass media. Just seems like it would be an interesting topic that probably has some relevance today.
- dredmorbius 4y agoOne of the most delightful takes I've run across is a 1909 lecture by Hamilton Holt, himself a magazine publisher, titled Comemercialism and Journalism. It's a short, engaging, fact-filled, and highly-informative read: https://archive.org/details/commercialismjou00holtuoft https://archive.org/details/commercialismjou00holtuoft Other than that, I've compiled a "light reading list" which I still feel is a good starting point though I'd probably add to it. Previously mentioned in this thread, and inlcuding Holts's work, as well as several of the other suggestions responding to your question. https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_advertising_sustainability_externalities/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_a...
- WA9ACE 4y agoI very much enjoyed Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman.
- rsa4046 4y agoGreat book, well ahead of its time.
- MrDunham 4y agoNot exactly what you’re asking for but Ryan Holiday makes the “yellow journalism is back again” point in “Trust Me, I’m Lying - Confessions of a media Manipulator”. It’s a (terrifyingly) good book and he goes into how he engineered nationwide protests and counter protests starting with a billboard he paid for and defaced - all to drum up interest for a movie. Also includes other shenanigans he did that the attention-driven media ate up and never fact checked. I also have a friend who has fooled/manipulated the media on a National scale to humiliate the US Navy (he’s a Westpoint grad). So… there’s likely truth to the book.
- NERD_ALERT 4y agoManufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky. It was written in 1988 but is still one of the greatest breakdowns of the formation and behavior of mass media I’ve ever seen. Still manages to be relevant today.
- CSMastermind 4y agoThe Chief: The Life of William Randolph Hearst by David Nasaw and Pulitzer: A Life in Politics, Print, and Power by James McGrath Morris both cover the time period I'm referencing through the lens of two of the most powerful men in the industry at that time. The Form of News: A History by Barnhurst and Nerone is a dry and academic take but a pretty informative one.
- mattbuilds 4y agoThose sound great, thanks for the suggestions!
- bnralt 4y agoPublic Opinion by Walter Lippmann, written 100 years ago but honestly just as applicable today. Libre Vox even has a free version up on YouTube[1]. Chomsky actually took the title of his book from Lippmann's, but Lippmann's is a much more advanced and nuanced take (also Chomsky has grossly misrepresented what Lippmann was saying, so I find it hard to trust him). [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX1eEQVDdjA&t=1s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX1eEQVDdjA&t=1s
- chasil 4y agoNews sources that want to save themselves must alter themselves in this way: - present multiple extremes - find the recommended mid ground from their perspective - show the consequences of extremes To simply show a single perspective isn't journalism, from my own perspective.
- colordrops 4y agoOr just report god damn facts like a wikipedia article. I'm sick of all these opinions being passed off as news these days. If something is an opinion or assessment by the journalist, it should be marked in bold with red flashing letters. Yes facts can be omitted or selectively woven to support a narrative, but that's a different problem, and can be relatively easily detected by cross referencing sources.
- cyberbanjo 4y agoBest source of news is Wikipedia, honestly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events
- mgh2 4y agoWikipedia can be edited by anyone, what is stopping anonymous bad actors from manipulating it? The same can be said of anything on the internet, largely controlled by big tech, what is stopping them from manipulating information for profit?
- jdkee 4y agoJack Blakin over at Yale law has been writing about this very issue (and proposing solutions) for some time. See https://lpeproject.org/blog/the-political-economy-of-freedom-of-speech-in-the-second-gilded-age/ https://lpeproject.org/blog/the-political-economy-of-freedom... See also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4daIk8PCPIc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4daIk8PCPIc