Wordle - daily game
- Proclivities - May 6, 2024 - 11:21am
Politically Uncorrect News
- R_P - May 6, 2024 - 11:16am
Reviews and Pix from your concerts and shows you couldn't...
- pilgrim - May 6, 2024 - 9:57am
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - May 6, 2024 - 9:52am
Trump
- Steely_D - May 6, 2024 - 9:44am
Global Warming
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 6, 2024 - 9:29am
Israel
- R_P - May 6, 2024 - 9:23am
Tales from the RAFT
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 6, 2024 - 9:19am
NYTimes Connections
- ptooey - May 6, 2024 - 8:39am
NY Times Strands
- ptooey - May 6, 2024 - 8:34am
Mixtape Culture Club
- ColdMiser - May 6, 2024 - 7:40am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 6, 2024 - 6:22am
Radio Paradise Comments
- Coaxial - May 6, 2024 - 4:36am
Food
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 6, 2024 - 4:17am
Farts!
- RazzCat - May 5, 2024 - 10:03pm
What Did You See Today?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 5, 2024 - 5:28pm
What can you hear right now?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 5, 2024 - 5:27pm
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Antigone - May 5, 2024 - 5:06pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 4:38pm
The Abortion Wars
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 3:27pm
Those Lovable Policemen
- R_P - May 5, 2024 - 3:12pm
The Obituary Page
- Red_Dragon - May 5, 2024 - 2:53pm
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - May 5, 2024 - 2:16pm
Ukraine
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 12:33pm
What Are You Going To Do Today?
- GeneP59 - May 5, 2024 - 12:07pm
volcano!
- geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 9:55am
Song of the Day
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 5, 2024 - 9:26am
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc)
- miamizsun - May 5, 2024 - 6:16am
Russia
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 5, 2024 - 12:03am
Favorite Quotes
- Isabeau - May 4, 2024 - 5:21pm
Anti-War
- R_P - May 4, 2024 - 3:24pm
Iran
- Red_Dragon - May 4, 2024 - 12:03pm
Live Music
- oldviolin - May 4, 2024 - 11:18am
Other Medical Stuff
- kurtster - May 4, 2024 - 10:24am
SCOTUS
- Steely_D - May 4, 2024 - 8:04am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 4:51pm
The Dragons' Roost
- GeneP59 - May 3, 2024 - 3:53pm
Name My Band
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 3:04pm
RightWingNutZ
- islander - May 3, 2024 - 11:55am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- MrDill - May 3, 2024 - 11:41am
Poetry Forum
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:46am
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:36am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:24am
Lyrics that strike a chord today...
- R_P - May 3, 2024 - 7:54am
Derplahoma!
- sunybuny - May 3, 2024 - 4:56am
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum
- miamizsun - May 3, 2024 - 4:36am
What Makes You Laugh?
- miamizsun - May 3, 2024 - 4:31am
Main Mix Playlist
- R567 - May 3, 2024 - 12:06am
Who Killed The Electric Car??? -- The Movie
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 2, 2024 - 9:51pm
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 5:56pm
What Makes You Sad?
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:35pm
songs that ROCK!
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:07pm
Breaking News
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 2:57pm
Questions.
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:13am
And the good news is....
- Bill_J - May 1, 2024 - 6:30pm
Things you would be grating food for
- Manbird - May 1, 2024 - 3:58pm
Economix
- black321 - May 1, 2024 - 12:19pm
I Heart Huckabee - NOT!
- Manbird - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:49pm
Democratic Party
- R_P - Apr 30, 2024 - 4:01pm
Oh, The Stupidity
- haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 3:30pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- VV - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:46pm
Canada
- black321 - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:37pm
New Music
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 11:36am
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 8:34am
Photos you haven't taken of yourself
- Antigone - Apr 29, 2024 - 5:03am
Britain
- R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:47am
Birthday wishes
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:56am
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 27, 2024 - 9:53pm
Classical Music
- miamizsun - Apr 27, 2024 - 1:23pm
LeftWingNutZ
- Lazy8 - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:46pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:17pm
The Moon
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:08pm
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- fractalv - Apr 26, 2024 - 8:59pm
Musky Mythology
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 7:23pm
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 4:02pm
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
General Discussion »
Media Matters
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next |
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 3, 2017 - 8:28am |
|
Lazy8 wrote: 1. There are fewer traditional media outlets to hire journalists, no question. They are competing in a market where there are too many suppliers chasing the same eyeballs. There will be consolidation, already underway; when the Des Moines Register can instantly reach readers in Talladega, Alabama that is going to drive down the need for an independent news source in each place. A lot of small town newspapers and radio stations are being bought up by conglomerates. I don't wring my hands over this, I see it as a sign that those small town newspapers weren't serving their readers well enough to keep their attention.
2. Oh holy crap yes. It's still too easy to lie to people. I'd hasten to point out that t'was ever thus, it's just that now people have an easier time finding lies that appeal to their prejudices rather than to the prejudices of the editors at media outlets and seek those out.
3. See 2, above. We'll get better at it as we live with the internet longer and shed our old habits. Kids entering college now have never lived in a world without Google. It has never been easier to debunk a lie. It has also never been easier to spread one. Our future depends on training those kids on how to fight the latter with the former. The arc of human history reassures me that we'll eventually get this right.
4. See 2, above.
5. I rest my case.
So what do we do to produce smarter consumers of information? Should we have some sort of formalized bullshit detection training in public schools? Leaving people to wander the intertubes unguided, as you note, usually results in their finding information that confirms their biases, rather than brings enlightenment.
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 2, 2017 - 1:53pm |
|
aflanigan wrote:Nowhere did I say that journalism was once subsidized by government/not a private enterprise activity during our history.
Instead of trotting out a straw man argument, maybe have a go at accepting my invitation to a civil discussion about the health and future survival of investigative journalism?
1. Yes, there is still good journalism being done. It seems however that the ease with which it can find a stable home to exist is disappearing. Do you agree with this, or do you think it is thriving?
2. Maybe part of the issue is that it's still being done, but is being drowned out by a proliferation of bad journalism and outright crap/fake stuff?
3. The "direct to consumer" notion you mention is intriguing, but like "direct to consumer" medical information, is ripe for abuse. Most consumers of news aren't well equipped to distinguish BS from good journalism.
4. Old school organizations in theory have layers of vetting (well, maybe one or two), which work imperfectly, but most of the time I assume they work pretty well.
5. EDIT: I used the phrase "government subsidies" in reference to an alternative to profit-based journalism that is not likely to expand any time soon. Schafer mentioned journalism done by NPR as being "directly subsidized" (it receives about 14% of its budget from federal, state, and local govts.) but that sort of direct government support is not likely to be significantly enlarged, particularly when some on the right are not happy about taxpayer money is being used for what they consider "biased news". And it does create the potential appearance of an interrelationship which would potentially tarnish the notion of a truly independent fourth estate. 1. There are fewer traditional media outlets to hire journalists, no question. They are competing in a market where there are too many suppliers chasing the same eyeballs. There will be consolidation, already underway; when the Des Moines Register can instantly reach readers in Talladega, Alabama that is going to drive down the need for an independent news source in each place. A lot of small town newspapers and radio stations are being bought up by conglomerates. I don't wring my hands over this, I see it as a sign that those small town newspapers weren't serving their readers well enough to keep their attention. 2. Oh holy crap yes. It's still too easy to lie to people. I'd hasten to point out that t'was ever thus, it's just that now people have an easier time finding lies that appeal to their prejudices rather than to the prejudices of the editors at media outlets and seek those out. 3. See 2, above. We'll get better at it as we live with the internet longer and shed our old habits. Kids entering college now have never lived in a world without Google. It has never been easier to debunk a lie. It has also never been easier to spread one. Our future depends on training those kids on how to fight the latter with the former. The arc of human history reassures me that we'll eventually get this right. 4. See 2, above. 5. I rest my case.
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 2, 2017 - 1:22pm |
|
Lazy8 wrote: aflanigan wrote:No, but thanks for once again putting words in my mouth! Sorry, it's hard to parse what you wrote any other way. You described investigative journalism as being in decline, and list the forces driving that decline as the profit motive and a lack of government subsidies. If you meant something else maybe you should elaborate. Nowhere did I say that journalism was once subsidized by government/not a private enterprise activity during our history. Instead of trotting out a straw man argument, maybe have a go at accepting my invitation to a civil discussion about the health and future survival of investigative journalism? Yes, there is still good journalism being done. It seems however that the ease with which it can find a stable home to exist is disappearing. Do you agree with this, or do you think it is thriving? Maybe part of the issue is that it's still being done, but is being drowned out by a proliferation of bad journalism and outright crap/fake stuff? The "direct to consumer" notion you mention is intriguing, but like "direct to consumer" medical information, is ripe for abuse. Most consumers of news aren't well equipped to distinguish BS from good journalism. Old school organizations in theory have layers of vetting (well, maybe one or two), which work imperfectly, but most of the time I assume they work pretty well. EDIT: I used the phrase "government subsidies" in reference to an alternative to profit-based journalism that is not likely to expand any time soon. Schafer mentioned journalism done by NPR as being "directly subsidized" (it receives about 14% of its budget from federal, state, and local govts.) but that sort of direct government support is not likely to be significantly enlarged, particularly when some on the right are not happy about taxpayer money is being used for what they consider "biased news". And it does create the potential appearance of an interrelationship which could tarnish the notion of a truly independent fourth estate.
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 2, 2017 - 12:20pm |
|
aflanigan wrote:No, but thanks for once again putting words in my mouth! Sorry, it's hard to parse what you wrote any other way. You described investigative journalism as being in decline, and list the forces driving that decline as the profit motive and a lack of government subsidies. If you meant something else maybe you should elaborate. I'll go ahead and point out in advance (assuming my characterization of your point is correct for the moment) that the profit motive has always existed, that the vast majority of journalists (especially those renowned as investigative journalists) have always been employed by profit-making companies, and the government subsidies you seem to think might help have never done much for investigative journalism. I'd go further (having read the review) and criticize a point Shafer makes: FOIA foot-dragging (real as it is) isn't a likely cause of this decline, as the Freedom of Information Act only dates to 1966 and the federal government has never been enthusiastic about following it. I have to wonder if you really read this review yourself; Shafer points out that most of what investigative journalism is concerned with is government malfeasance, and that limiting the scope and reach of government would lessen the need for it. There would still be private-sector scandals to expose of course, so we will always need journalists, but in the modern age we can do a lot of it ourselves. You don't have to get the Washington Post interested in your revelation anymore, you can leak to all the world's newspapers at once. With a camera in every cell phone they'd never be able to hide Paul McCartney's death anymore! With all these pressures being applied there is still great investigative journalism being done, and finding a decent audience. It tends to get directly from the journalist to the reader without filling the coffers of the rest of the industry, and there are an awful lot more people who want to be journalists than their talents will justify or the market will bear. How to make a living performing a task people can increasingly do themselves is not a problem limited to journalism. Nothing is stopping any of us from doing investigative journalism except the desire to be well paid for doing it.
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 2, 2017 - 8:58am |
|
Lazy8 wrote:
So the fourth estate didn't used to be based on profit-making companies back in the golden age? It used to be government subsidized?
Tell me more of this planet you speak of.
No, but thanks for once again putting words in my mouth!
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 1, 2017 - 3:56pm |
|
Lazy8 wrote: aflanigan wrote:So for those who decry fake news, bad reporting, political corruption, etc. and wonder what happened to the golden age of journalism, the $64,000 question is: How can a fourth estate based on profit making companies, independent of government subsidies (which would reek of the potential for propaganda), continue to ensure the survival of good quality investigative journalism when it doesn't make you much money? Democracy's Detectives (book review) So the fourth estate didn't used to be based on profit-making companies back in the golden age? It used to be government subsidized? Tell me more of this planet you speak of. ... You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.”
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 1, 2017 - 3:40pm |
|
aflanigan wrote:So for those who decry fake news, bad reporting, political corruption, etc. and wonder what happened to the golden age of journalism, the $64,000 question is: How can a fourth estate based on profit making companies, independent of government subsidies (which would reek of the potential for propaganda), continue to ensure the survival of good quality investigative journalism when it doesn't make you much money? Democracy's Detectives (book review) So the fourth estate didn't used to be based on profit-making companies back in the golden age? It used to be government subsidized? Tell me more of this planet you speak of.
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Aug 1, 2017 - 3:18pm |
|
So for those who decry fake news, bad reporting, political corruption, etc. and wonder what happened to the golden age of journalism, the $64,000 question is: How can a fourth estate based on profit making companies, independent of government subsidies (which would reek of the potential for propaganda), continue to ensure the survival of good quality investigative journalism when it doesn't make you much money? Democracy's Detectives (book review)
|
|
Red_Dragon
Location: Dumbf*ckistan
|
Posted:
Jul 20, 2017 - 3:01pm |
|
|
|
Proclivities
Location: Paris of the Piedmont Gender:
|
Posted:
Jan 18, 2017 - 7:26am |
|
kurtster wrote: You mean like 8 years of attacks of Fox News as illegitimate, the attacks on the Associated Press and Rosen of Fox News as criminals in particular ?
The "attacks" against Fox News' legitimacy (largely by non-governmental entities) could not really be considered "personal", and the AP and Rosen "investigations" you brought up are mentioned in the linked article; I guess you didn't finish reading it all. "The Obama administration also repeatedly threatened journalists with prison under the guise of investigations into leaks that allegedly threatened national security. When I was senior managing editor of the Associated Press, the Obama administration secretly seized the wire service's phone records in order to reveal AP's sources. A New York Times reporter, James Risen, was kept under threat of jail for years to pressure him to reveal his sources. An FBI agent accused Fox News reporter James Rosen of possible espionage for basic reporting. NPR and other news organizations reported on these actions and protested vehemently. These were chilling threats to obstruct journalism and even criminalize it. I and many other journalists said so. Risen described the Obama administration as the most antagonistic to the press of any since Nixon." One other difference is that we have a President-Elect who has expressed his desire to re-write the First Amendment (e.g.: "open up libel laws") several times.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Jan 18, 2017 - 6:29am |
|
Red_Dragon wrote: You mean like 8 years of attacks of Fox News as illegitimate, the attacks on the Associated Press and Rosen of Fox News as criminals in particular ?
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Jan 17, 2017 - 4:27pm |
|
“If you, Mr. Trump, fail to take the Russian threat seriously, if you do not disentangle yourself from your business interests, if you promote corrupt or conflicted advisers and cabinet members, if you fail to understand the gravity of the foreign policy crisis you face, if you deprive millions of health care without an alternative, if you fail to act on the global threat of climate change, if you pit Americans against each other by race, gender, and religion, if you undermine science and reason … there will be an asterisk next to your name,” Rather wrote.
|
|
Red_Dragon
Location: Dumbf*ckistan
|
Posted:
Jan 17, 2017 - 3:48pm |
|
|
|
Steely_D
Location: Biscayne Bay Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 21, 2016 - 7:50pm |
|
aflanigan wrote: Did newspapers exist to make a profit and get eyeballs?
|
|
Skydog
|
Posted:
Nov 21, 2016 - 7:01pm |
|
aflanigan wrote: Lazy8 wrote: .
Steve Bannon will totally neutralize the news media, Trump just released an in-house produced video on YouTube of policies passing up the media. . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xX_KaStFT8
|
|
Lazy8
Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 21, 2016 - 6:29pm |
|
The low point arrived when my editor G-chatted me with the observation that our traffic figures were lagging that day and ordered me to ‘publish something within the hour,’” Andrew Leonard, who left Salon in 2014, recalled in a post. “Which, translated into my new reality, meant ‘Go troll Twitter for something to get mad about — Uber, or Mark Zuckerberg, or Tea Party Republicans — and then produce a rant about it.’ … I performed my duty, but not without thinking, ‘Is this what 25 years as a dedicated reporter have led to?’ That’s when it dawned on me: I was no longer inventing the future. I was a victim of it. So I quit my job to keep my sanity.”
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 31, 2016 - 9:00am |
|
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Oct 15, 2015 - 12:44pm |
|
My bet is yes. Within 24 hours of Abedin's meeting with committee staffers, the leaks will appear in the media.
|
|
aflanigan
Location: At Sea Gender:
|
Posted:
Oct 13, 2015 - 3:01pm |
|
Self-proclaimed "War Correspondent" and serial fabricator Bill O'Reilly once again humiliated by people who deal in actual facts.
|
|
R_P
Gender:
|
Posted:
Sep 4, 2015 - 11:00am |
|
aflanigan wrote:What do you think? Should this photo have been published by media outlets? Yes, it should. I find it more sad than 'horrific'.
|
|
|