3 ms·
> It's not that journalism has cratered, it only reached a level of what people are willing to consume. I've seen this in writing from journalists and writers,
by makeitdouble 3y ago
> It's not that journalism has cratered, it only reached a level of what people are willing to consume.
I've seen this in writing from journalists and writers, and feel like this is too easy of an out. It's as if readers were in a vacuum and journalism didn't affect them in any way shape or form. I don't buy that the press and media had no hand in creating the current public's lowered expectations.
So perhaps it's what people are willing to consume now, but it's after decades and decades of market shaping and journalistic exposure. We can't just ignore that.
- beowulfey 3y agoWhen journalism decided to make a deal with the Devil, and ads became the main source of revenue, it was inevitable for writing to shift towards maximizing clicks. The dopamine pulses of this style cannot be ignored and so to compete all news eventually reached equilibrium in this same vein.
- dmreedy 3y agoWhile I agree with your conclusion, for what it's worth I'm not sure journalism "decided" anything. The economic system it is embedded in did. I say that because it's not like the pattern is unique to journalism.