4 ms·

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers m

The news industry makes a lot of sense when viewed as a category of entertainment. Reporters write stories and people read them to be entertained. Newspapers make money when more people read the stories. No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. This isn't the only way to view the news industry but it certainly explains a lot.

dylan604 1y ago
Modern news sites refer to other new sites frequently. "as reported by _____" is seen frequently. links to other sites' Twitt..er, X feeds are also common.
padolsey 1y ago
> That's just an advertisement for their competitor. I think the simpler explanation is just laziness and no positive incentive or obligation, as opposed to proactive competitive practices..
- permo-w 1y ago
  newspapers have semi-regularly updated style guides. I don't see how its much of a stretch that some would decide to include this. let's remember who we're talking about here
marcus_holmes 1y ago
There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organisations are being forced to write stories that have no integrity under an editorial policy that is designed to promote a partisan point of view. There's no working business model for real investigative journalism, but our democratic systems need real investigative journalism in order to function properly and hold politicians to account. Nothing else does. Independent journalists can make this happen, but how do we recognise a "real" independent journalist doing real investigative journalism from an activist blogger with an axe to grind? [0] I'm not saying that the author is not a journalist, or inferring that they're a blogger.
- psychoslave 1y ago
  The difference between the casual blogger and the professional journalist are not of nature, but degrees on different axes. The main difference from a societal point of view are obviously all the privileges and duties given to a pro in a field, be it writing or anything else actually. Independence is ever denial or lie when it comes to social interaction. No one is an island, or if you prefer, under the sea even island are connected on solid grounds and all kinds of life forms are able to travel from one island to an other. There is nothing as an absolutely isolated zone. Also you can be trappist, but simultaneously claiming to be the president of the universe won't hold much attention.
- monkeyelite 1y ago
  The divide is almost entirely in status - not in actions or morals. It’s important to remember they are competitors and both have an interest in guarding their audience. More cynically, almost all news these days is PR. There is very little new information entering the system from journalists - just synthesis of information provided to them. So traditional journalists are not unlike bloggers in this way either.
- danihh 1y ago
  I’m sure that opinions vary widely on this, but I follow people and not companies. With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. As long as they create quality content, I’m more than happy to subscribe to whatever platform they choose to use. True quality (especially once you get into the niches) is extremely valuable/interesting and to paraphrase Van Gogh, wheat is wheat, even if townsfolk see it as grass at first.
  - pell 1y ago
    > With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. Cultivating an audience is one thing but serious investigative journalism often takes considerable amount of time and money. Most journalists I’ve seen on Substack and similar platforms seem to mainly do commentary, summaries of topics, interviews, and the like. There is a place for that of course but it isn’t really filling the need for investigative journalism too well at the moment.
jancsika 1y ago
> No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. Just read the CBS article linked by the author. As she mentions it always cited WaPo. And it now it properly cites her, too: "The Rwanda arrangements were first reported by the Washington Post, which also cited work by independent journalist Marisa Kabas, who had uncovered the recent deportation from the U.S. of an Iraqi national to Rwanda."
- chimeracoder 1y ago
  > Just read the CBS article linked by the author. As she mentions it always cited WaPo. And it now it properly cites her, too: I wouldn't say it properly cites her. It says that the Washington Post reported it first, which is nonsensical because in the very same sentence it says that Washington Post cited Kabas.
- grumbel 1y ago
  I'd be more impressed if they'd used a hyperlink. But that's apparently forbidden in modern journalism.
  - pastage 1y ago
    It is not worth the bother. I really wish I had a source for this because it stills feels important, and I value links more than most. Links would be nice but it does not add enough value to be worth it, it actually costs too much and is easy to mess up. The ones who care will search for it, and the great majority can not be bothered. Source: internal statistic from a webbserver, with fact heavy articles. There were some types of articles that needed source material. But these kinds not so much. I say this because I was involved in a project that worked on QA and maintaining links. We wasted money on that project.
    - dannyobrien 1y ago
      Costs too much in what way? In time?
ab5tract 1y ago
This is totally ahistorical. Regional newspapers would “break” stories that would then get picked up by national outlets. In that system it was the standard to reference the paper that first reported the story. People understandably have a hard time conceptualizing a highly dynamic and diverse news media landscape these days, but back when it was working like it was supposed to —- before Clinton-era reforms destroyed the laws protecting against consolidation -— it was not as simple to suppress a story because you had actual competition who would profit if you didn’t. In other words, news wasn’t always so distinctly “entertainment” and the rules which govern news items in a landscape of less than a handful of media conglomerates are nothing like what used to govern in a less starkly dystopian version of the same.
- pastage 1y ago
  It is not the first time I have heard a local issue in the US by cited as a source of a global problem. I am fairly certain that Clinton had nothing to do with this global problem, he was president during a time were lots of things changed.
  - ab5tract 1y ago
    If you can find any examples of non-totalitarian regimes that are facing the same media consolidation problems that were not immediately preceded by Clinton-esque laws deregulating said media consolidation, I would love to know about it! EDIT: The “world wide web” also played a major role in kneecapping the funding sources of journalism. But failing outlets could not simply be swallowed by conglomerates without the aforementioned liberalization of media ownership.
    - pastage 1y ago
      It is not that simple and sure I gained from that deregulation. We got to export lots of knowledge and tech to the US. I remember people coming back and just shaking their head at the competition, it was easy money for a decade. You still are suffering because of the telecommunication regulations like last mile internet. You are free to link something about consolidation and how that is bad and only because of Clinton. I think this is a case where your local situation makes it hard to understand.
snthpy 1y ago
Thanks, that's a really interesting perspective. None of the parts were new to me but the framing has got me thinking about it in a new way. I am now wondering what different incentives would align it more with my values or orient it towards societal outcomes that I care about?
christkv 1y ago
More and more is opinion which is cheap and in many cases can be outsourced for no money down. Then you have sponsored articles that are just ads disguised as news.

dylan604 1y ago

Modern news sites refer to other new sites frequently. "as reported by _____" is seen frequently. links to other sites' Twitt..er, X feeds are also common.

padolsey 1y ago

> That's just an advertisement for their competitor. I think the simpler explanation is just laziness and no positive incentive or obligation, as opposed to proactive competitive practices..

permo-w 1y ago
newspapers have semi-regularly updated style guides. I don't see how its much of a stretch that some would decide to include this. let's remember who we're talking about here

marcus_holmes 1y ago

There's also a professional divide between "journalists" and "bloggers" [0]. If anyone can start their own website and write stuff, without getting any kind of qualification or accreditation, and without following any editorial policy or maintaining any kind of journalistic integrity, and still get credited with a story, then journalism itself has an identity crisis. Meanwhile, (some) journalists at (some) news organisations are being forced to write stories that have no integrity under an editorial policy that is designed to promote a partisan point of view. There's no working business model for real investigative journalism, but our democratic systems need real investigative journalism in order to function properly and hold politicians to account. Nothing else does. Independent journalists can make this happen, but how do we recognise a "real" independent journalist doing real investigative journalism from an activist blogger with an axe to grind? [0] I'm not saying that the author is not a journalist, or inferring that they're a blogger.

psychoslave 1y ago
The difference between the casual blogger and the professional journalist are not of nature, but degrees on different axes. The main difference from a societal point of view are obviously all the privileges and duties given to a pro in a field, be it writing or anything else actually. Independence is ever denial or lie when it comes to social interaction. No one is an island, or if you prefer, under the sea even island are connected on solid grounds and all kinds of life forms are able to travel from one island to an other. There is nothing as an absolutely isolated zone. Also you can be trappist, but simultaneously claiming to be the president of the universe won't hold much attention.
monkeyelite 1y ago
The divide is almost entirely in status - not in actions or morals. It’s important to remember they are competitors and both have an interest in guarding their audience. More cynically, almost all news these days is PR. There is very little new information entering the system from journalists - just synthesis of information provided to them. So traditional journalists are not unlike bloggers in this way either.
danihh 1y ago
I’m sure that opinions vary widely on this, but I follow people and not companies. With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. As long as they create quality content, I’m more than happy to subscribe to whatever platform they choose to use. True quality (especially once you get into the niches) is extremely valuable/interesting and to paraphrase Van Gogh, wheat is wheat, even if townsfolk see it as grass at first.
- pell 1y ago
  > With platforms like substack, X, and LinkedIn it seems easier than ever for an independent journalist to cultivate an audience. Cultivating an audience is one thing but serious investigative journalism often takes considerable amount of time and money. Most journalists I’ve seen on Substack and similar platforms seem to mainly do commentary, summaries of topics, interviews, and the like. There is a place for that of course but it isn’t really filling the need for investigative journalism too well at the moment.

jancsika 1y ago

> No wonder that newspapers don't cite others... That's just an advertisement for their competitor. Just read the CBS article linked by the author. As she mentions it always cited WaPo. And it now it properly cites her, too: "The Rwanda arrangements were first reported by the Washington Post, which also cited work by independent journalist Marisa Kabas, who had uncovered the recent deportation from the U.S. of an Iraqi national to Rwanda."

chimeracoder 1y ago
> Just read the CBS article linked by the author. As she mentions it always cited WaPo. And it now it properly cites her, too: I wouldn't say it properly cites her. It says that the Washington Post reported it first, which is nonsensical because in the very same sentence it says that Washington Post cited Kabas.
grumbel 1y ago
I'd be more impressed if they'd used a hyperlink. But that's apparently forbidden in modern journalism.
- pastage 1y ago
  It is not worth the bother. I really wish I had a source for this because it stills feels important, and I value links more than most. Links would be nice but it does not add enough value to be worth it, it actually costs too much and is easy to mess up. The ones who care will search for it, and the great majority can not be bothered. Source: internal statistic from a webbserver, with fact heavy articles. There were some types of articles that needed source material. But these kinds not so much. I say this because I was involved in a project that worked on QA and maintaining links. We wasted money on that project.
  - dannyobrien 1y ago
    Costs too much in what way? In time?

ab5tract 1y ago

This is totally ahistorical. Regional newspapers would “break” stories that would then get picked up by national outlets. In that system it was the standard to reference the paper that first reported the story. People understandably have a hard time conceptualizing a highly dynamic and diverse news media landscape these days, but back when it was working like it was supposed to —- before Clinton-era reforms destroyed the laws protecting against consolidation -— it was not as simple to suppress a story because you had actual competition who would profit if you didn’t. In other words, news wasn’t always so distinctly “entertainment” and the rules which govern news items in a landscape of less than a handful of media conglomerates are nothing like what used to govern in a less starkly dystopian version of the same.

pastage 1y ago
It is not the first time I have heard a local issue in the US by cited as a source of a global problem. I am fairly certain that Clinton had nothing to do with this global problem, he was president during a time were lots of things changed.
- ab5tract 1y ago
  If you can find any examples of non-totalitarian regimes that are facing the same media consolidation problems that were not immediately preceded by Clinton-esque laws deregulating said media consolidation, I would love to know about it! EDIT: The “world wide web” also played a major role in kneecapping the funding sources of journalism. But failing outlets could not simply be swallowed by conglomerates without the aforementioned liberalization of media ownership.
  - pastage 1y ago
    It is not that simple and sure I gained from that deregulation. We got to export lots of knowledge and tech to the US. I remember people coming back and just shaking their head at the competition, it was easy money for a decade. You still are suffering because of the telecommunication regulations like last mile internet. You are free to link something about consolidation and how that is bad and only because of Clinton. I think this is a case where your local situation makes it hard to understand.

snthpy 1y ago

Thanks, that's a really interesting perspective. None of the parts were new to me but the framing has got me thinking about it in a new way. I am now wondering what different incentives would align it more with my values or orient it towards societal outcomes that I care about?

christkv 1y ago

More and more is opinion which is cheap and in many cases can be outsourced for no money down. Then you have sponsored articles that are just ads disguised as news.