You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

anonOpenPress ago

There lies a visible problem behind the whole journalism in U.S, which could be put in one sentence:

America is divided in two, and the public is picking their news sources based on ideology.

Under this, there's yet a bigger problem. Bigger mediums have no intention to get rid of the dividence as it benefits both parties and the medium owners in the long run. One of their biggest worries is that some 3rd party medium brings this fact into common knowledge. This is already happening and the trust on main stream media has now reduced to about 30%. They'd like to get rid of that 3rd party, but they were late.

They tried to flag the 3rd party as "fake news" in a situation they were already seen as fake news themselves. They underestimated their readers.

The next step is to lower the flag, as it turned against them, and put up a new tactic. This is to point out how untrustful the 3rd party is. For us, one visible example is the apology by Alex Jones and how it's taken advance of in many levels. It's not the apology itself which is the news here - It's turned upside down in purpose to make the whole apology questionable. Wether it's real or not doesn't matter - both the readers who believe in it, and the readers with an opposite point of view are given an idea that there's something not matching. This reduces the trust on all 3rd parties in a longer run.

They're still underestimating their readers. People are starting to see through clever tactics in multiple levels

The only solution for mediums to get back into their core business - valuable journalism is to (1) Find out what their readers are interested in (2) find out all the related people and facts (3) share all the facts, but unlike in traditional journalism which doesn't sell any more, (4) including an opinion, clearly stated as an opinion, into the story

The mediums are unable to use this tactic, as it would directly hurt their owners and partners

Only those 3rd party mediums who are not bind into agreements (especially into profitable ones) with the persons affected by the news are able to do this. But their problem, on the other hand, is pure lack of resources. They can't dig into fact checking. They don't have tools to check their sources. They need to accept unknown writers into the team. They are easily mislead, and they tend to share shit among valuable stuff.

The readers should both require and support better content

While most of the readers interested in 3rd party sources are mostly fed up with the tactics used by main stream media, they tend not to be critical on 3rd party news. They're simply happy the 3rd parties exists, supporting and sharing them blindly. This, on the other hand, gives the main stream media direct tools to oppose them. It's like the readers are giving a hammer fot MSM to nail down 3rd parties. The solution is, again, simple:

The reader should be aware of modern medium reading skills (even take a cource on that) to be evenly critical to both MSM and 3rd party news, and show their support for a good, valuable posts no matter of the source. Valuable 3rd parties should be supported also with money.

This, in the long run, will guide every medium towards valuable journalism.