As much as I ideologically hate the loss of these institutions and fantasize about going back to a time when it felt like these things worked.
I don’t know that it ever worked and maybe there’s a hump we can get over when individuals really can create their own media. It feels like we’re getting there with journalism, through real investigative or international journalism may always be prohibitively expensive (sharing an opinion or researching public data is easy. Else not so much)
But I’ve never really enjoyed the news. The news has never been what the newsroom said it was, at least not in my lifetime. It was always pretty shallow.
Hollywood is similar, it was certainly better?, but will we get to the point that a movie line rounders could be self-financed?
We have no basis for believing that the loss of the institutions we're losing will lead to something better. It's a lie sold by demagogues who profit from the vacuum.
I mean, It’s nuanced and maybe I agree with the underlying point you’re trying to make, but I absolutely think there’s evidence there is something better because we have it. Independent journalists have more freedom to provide a larger diversity of opinions and perspectives that often go deeper than legacy media ever did.
> It feels like we’re getting there with journalism
Huh? Media is less trusted now than it’s ever been and that’s largely driven by Twitter driving people to be “first” instead of accurate.
Not to mention the state sponsored bots promoting lies to try to distract from actual journalism. Combine that with billionaires attempting to buy up all our trusted sources of news to completely control the narrative (a functioning government would put a nail in Ellison) and we’re screwed. And no, there’s 0 chance that individuals are filing the void that will be created. They don’t have the access or the funds to do anything significantly meaningful.
“ Smaller groups of wealthy businesspeople control larger swaths of the country's information ecosystem, pitting their overall corporate interests against the public's desire for accurate journalism challenging powerful institutions in society.”
> "2026 looks ominous for media, from Hollywood to journalism"
Ppl finally leaving legacy/corporate/virtue-signaling media is good news to me. The "free" western media being the exact opposite of free: owned by billionaires - is and old problem but a certain part of the population seems to notice only now when some of the owners took off the playlist their favorite "progressive" lullaby.
How in the world could something like that ever work today? For one thing, it presupposed that every issue could be addressed and represented by a small, finite number of "sides." For another, it justified its infringement of the First Amendment by limiting itself to over-the-air broadcast media, where the courts agreed that it was necessary for the FCC to manage a scarce public resource (spectrum) for the common good.
The first of those rationales was not valid then, and certainly isn't now.
And the second rationale wouldn't apply to anything but public airwaves... unless your idea of healthy regulation is to mandate the present administration's idea of "fairness" in print, cable media, and the Internet.
No, thanks. The Fairness Doctrine wasn't fair, and it wasn't a workable doctrine.
Incredible that yellow journalists will be out of work!
From the journalists that brought you agitprop on WMDs in Iraq (New York Times), a fabricated story on Russians hacking U.S. energy infrastructure to provoke war between superpowers (WaPo) or from NPR when they heavily implied a person who was violently attacked in his vehicle and then sped away to avoid the violence was a "right-wing extremist" involved in a "vehicle-ramming incident" (later deleted the evidence with no retraction or apology).
There is no such thing as an ethical mass media journalist, hence why they are historical low trust and are being lapped by citizen journalists, who receive orders of magnitude more views.
I’d highly recommend cutting off all western mass media (can’t speak to other cultures). Find some independent creators you trust instead. As somebody who thought they were fully aware of what propaganda looks like and thus not influenced by it, I was horribly wrong. Took years of abstinence to make this obvious.
Anytime I put on a popular TV show, sports, movies, etc it’s glaringly obvious this is corporate slop to control your thoughts. The CGI has gotten really cool though.
As much as I ideologically hate the loss of these institutions and fantasize about going back to a time when it felt like these things worked.
I don’t know that it ever worked and maybe there’s a hump we can get over when individuals really can create their own media. It feels like we’re getting there with journalism, through real investigative or international journalism may always be prohibitively expensive (sharing an opinion or researching public data is easy. Else not so much)
But I’ve never really enjoyed the news. The news has never been what the newsroom said it was, at least not in my lifetime. It was always pretty shallow.
Hollywood is similar, it was certainly better?, but will we get to the point that a movie line rounders could be self-financed?
We have no basis for believing that the loss of the institutions we're losing will lead to something better. It's a lie sold by demagogues who profit from the vacuum.
I mean, It’s nuanced and maybe I agree with the underlying point you’re trying to make, but I absolutely think there’s evidence there is something better because we have it. Independent journalists have more freedom to provide a larger diversity of opinions and perspectives that often go deeper than legacy media ever did.
> It feels like we’re getting there with journalism
Huh? Media is less trusted now than it’s ever been and that’s largely driven by Twitter driving people to be “first” instead of accurate.
Not to mention the state sponsored bots promoting lies to try to distract from actual journalism. Combine that with billionaires attempting to buy up all our trusted sources of news to completely control the narrative (a functioning government would put a nail in Ellison) and we’re screwed. And no, there’s 0 chance that individuals are filing the void that will be created. They don’t have the access or the funds to do anything significantly meaningful.
At last some good news
From the article:
“ Smaller groups of wealthy businesspeople control larger swaths of the country's information ecosystem, pitting their overall corporate interests against the public's desire for accurate journalism challenging powerful institutions in society.”
Curious what about that you see as “good news”?
> "2026 looks ominous for media, from Hollywood to journalism"
Ppl finally leaving legacy/corporate/virtue-signaling media is good news to me. The "free" western media being the exact opposite of free: owned by billionaires - is and old problem but a certain part of the population seems to notice only now when some of the owners took off the playlist their favorite "progressive" lullaby.
[flagged]
Fucking scumbag whining . Please just stfu
The Fairness Doctrine was repealed during the Reagan administration because it was deemed harmful to the first amendment.
I now believe that was a mistake. It was doing more good than harm.
How in the world could something like that ever work today? For one thing, it presupposed that every issue could be addressed and represented by a small, finite number of "sides." For another, it justified its infringement of the First Amendment by limiting itself to over-the-air broadcast media, where the courts agreed that it was necessary for the FCC to manage a scarce public resource (spectrum) for the common good.
The first of those rationales was not valid then, and certainly isn't now.
And the second rationale wouldn't apply to anything but public airwaves... unless your idea of healthy regulation is to mandate the present administration's idea of "fairness" in print, cable media, and the Internet.
No, thanks. The Fairness Doctrine wasn't fair, and it wasn't a workable doctrine.
Incredible that yellow journalists will be out of work!
From the journalists that brought you agitprop on WMDs in Iraq (New York Times), a fabricated story on Russians hacking U.S. energy infrastructure to provoke war between superpowers (WaPo) or from NPR when they heavily implied a person who was violently attacked in his vehicle and then sped away to avoid the violence was a "right-wing extremist" involved in a "vehicle-ramming incident" (later deleted the evidence with no retraction or apology).
There is no such thing as an ethical mass media journalist, hence why they are historical low trust and are being lapped by citizen journalists, who receive orders of magnitude more views.
I’d highly recommend cutting off all western mass media (can’t speak to other cultures). Find some independent creators you trust instead. As somebody who thought they were fully aware of what propaganda looks like and thus not influenced by it, I was horribly wrong. Took years of abstinence to make this obvious.
Anytime I put on a popular TV show, sports, movies, etc it’s glaringly obvious this is corporate slop to control your thoughts. The CGI has gotten really cool though.