4 ms·

IMO News shouldn't be a for-profit industry. For-profit news encourages poor journalism as you can make more money selling lies than selling the truth.

henning 18y ago
so should the USA have something like the BBC?
- jwilliams 18y ago
  Alternatively, the USA has PBS.
  - sachinag 18y ago
    And NPR, which is going gangbusters with increases in listeners.
    - biohacker42 18y ago
      Sorry about this attempted topic hijacking. I live in Mass but enjoy NHPR, does anyone know of good alarm clock radios that are powerful enough to get NHPR in Mass?
      - mechanical_fish 18y ago
        http://nhpr.org/ http://nhpr.org/ , click "Listen Live" at the top of the page? What you need is a clock radio that plays MP3 streams. Maybe the Chumby can help you?
        Daemmerung 18y ago
        Or a Squeezebox Boom.
        biohacker42 18y ago
        That looks good, thanks!
      - unalone 18y ago
        Really? People downvoted you for that? It adds to the discussion and it's a curious question. It's not entirely on-topic, but he did SAY that in advance.
biohacker42 18y ago
It's not that simple. While there is a very large market for silly lies - tabloids. That market also has a very low barrier to entry. There are market segments happy and able to pay for quality, try The Economist. Those markets are much smaller but also have a much higher barrier to entry, and a very affluent audience. I think what's killing the newspapers is that they tried to sit on two chairs at once. Trying to be both informative and popular. Without competition that might have worked, but it's over now. Because for pay news like the AP and Bloomberg and magazines The Atlantic Montly, etc, are doing just fine, and because tabloids are also fine, I don't think many will miss those going out of business. But I also agree with you, the non profit newspaper is a good option. I believe The Irish Times is a grant based non-profit.
anamax 18y ago
Most people lie for free so it's strange to suggest that profit is the problem.
- unalone 18y ago
  It's not about lying. It's about sensationalism. Either you tell in-depth news for a small group, or you go sensationalist to go after the masses. News groups increasingly tilted towards the latter for all of the last two decades.
  - anamax 18y ago
    Yup, the "small group" news is noted for its non-sensational approach. Not. (The vast majority of cranks are "small group".) Or, are you going with "subsidizers will pick well"?
byrneseyeview 18y ago
http://www.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:SSP http://www.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:SSP Take a look at that trend! (Switch to the 'annual' view). The free-market response is that the company turns around or goes bankrupt. If they were nationalized, you'd expect them to keep losing more and more money, until finally, someone had to take action -- by taxing blogs. I really don't think that competing for thousands of advertisers is going to make people more honest than serving a single owner with an infinite budget. They'd end up being even less honest than the average Fortune 500 company's internal newsletter.

henning 18y ago

so should the USA have something like the BBC?

jwilliams 18y ago
Alternatively, the USA has PBS.
- sachinag 18y ago
  And NPR, which is going gangbusters with increases in listeners.
  - biohacker42 18y ago
    Sorry about this attempted topic hijacking. I live in Mass but enjoy NHPR, does anyone know of good alarm clock radios that are powerful enough to get NHPR in Mass?
    - mechanical_fish 18y ago
      http://nhpr.org/ http://nhpr.org/ , click "Listen Live" at the top of the page? What you need is a clock radio that plays MP3 streams. Maybe the Chumby can help you?
      - Daemmerung 18y ago
        Or a Squeezebox Boom.
        biohacker42 18y ago
        That looks good, thanks!
    - unalone 18y ago
      Really? People downvoted you for that? It adds to the discussion and it's a curious question. It's not entirely on-topic, but he did SAY that in advance.

biohacker42 18y ago

It's not that simple. While there is a very large market for silly lies - tabloids. That market also has a very low barrier to entry. There are market segments happy and able to pay for quality, try The Economist. Those markets are much smaller but also have a much higher barrier to entry, and a very affluent audience. I think what's killing the newspapers is that they tried to sit on two chairs at once. Trying to be both informative and popular. Without competition that might have worked, but it's over now. Because for pay news like the AP and Bloomberg and magazines The Atlantic Montly, etc, are doing just fine, and because tabloids are also fine, I don't think many will miss those going out of business. But I also agree with you, the non profit newspaper is a good option. I believe The Irish Times is a grant based non-profit.

anamax 18y ago

Most people lie for free so it's strange to suggest that profit is the problem.

unalone 18y ago
It's not about lying. It's about sensationalism. Either you tell in-depth news for a small group, or you go sensationalist to go after the masses. News groups increasingly tilted towards the latter for all of the last two decades.
- anamax 18y ago
  Yup, the "small group" news is noted for its non-sensational approach. Not. (The vast majority of cranks are "small group".) Or, are you going with "subsidizers will pick well"?

byrneseyeview 18y ago

http://www.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:SSP http://www.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:SSP Take a look at that trend! (Switch to the 'annual' view). The free-market response is that the company turns around or goes bankrupt. If they were nationalized, you'd expect them to keep losing more and more money, until finally, someone had to take action -- by taxing blogs. I really don't think that competing for thousands of advertisers is going to make people more honest than serving a single owner with an infinite budget. They'd end up being even less honest than the average Fortune 500 company's internal newsletter.