3 ms·
Hm. On the one hand, I find this pretty cool. A singular-focus media campaign, and from what I read one that could actually provide some educational and enterta
by brainchild-adam 4y ago
Hm. On the one hand, I find this pretty cool. A singular-focus media campaign, and from what I read one that could actually provide some educational and entertainment value. Might be a good step by GE in terms of managing brand awareness and identity.
At the same time I'm a bit concerned by the influence advertisers and their interests have on media in general. Catering to advertisers does not always seem to align with the possibly more intrinsic goals and values of a newspaper, for example. Or what I would want from a newspaper.
- h11h 4y agoThis has been a concern since at least the 80s, when Manufacturing Consent discussed this very problem. The good news is that the New York Times is making a much higher proportion of its revenue from readers (thanks to the growth in digital subscriptions), while advertising revenue is much lower than it used to be, so, whatever effect it did have, it should be less now.
- smcnally 4y agoIt’s been a concern at least since the 1780s https://adverts250project.org/tag/benjamin-franklin/ https://adverts250project.org/tag/benjamin-franklin/
- philwelch 4y agoGood news is that the NYT doesn’t get biased by the ulterior motive of depending on advertisers for revenue. Bad news is that the NYT does get biased by the ulterior motive of pandering to their subscribers.