maybe they aren't able to assess that without some time to reflect back on it or investigate further.
Nope. They have no option but denial.
Remember, their outlet (whatever it is) must maintain a facade of integrity, a mask of competency. Admit that they haven't the staff to fully inform their readers/listeners/viewers, and the Emperor just admitted to strolling in full-on Godiva mode. Just admitting weakness affects their bottom line: the rates their advertisers pay.
it's so often sensationalist and then on to the next spectacle
That's always been the case. What happened in the Golden Age is simply that there were too many reporters, so they started digging into stories that previously went undug. Lots of crooked politicians got caught doing what they had done for decades.
When Craig made his list, the Classified Ads sections were empty overnight, and who-boy did those ads bring in the bucks.
When Google and others started more-or-less customizable ads online, the other leg of the stool crumbled. Literally thousands of papers closed after that.
Now the remaining papers have no choice but to go sensational. It's the last style left to them, since they don't really have enough people to do the deep-digging variety of journalism.
and for some semblance of the truth it behooves us to look to independent media....
Not so fast. It does alright, but it is chronically underfunded. We need to find money to pay professionals if we are going to fix this predicament.
are you a journalist? or do you just care about the truth?
I thought about journalism after college, which was just as the situation started to worsen. Got lucky there.
Everyone cares about the truth. I care that the populace is informed sufficiently to make pragmatic decisions (which they aren't).
Full disclosure: I started reading about media in earnest after I started my podcast, which focuses on advertising. All of our news is commercial; I followed that train of thought and found where it got to the wreck in the tracks caused by the fleeing of ad money.
There's lots of good information out there on all of this. It just tends to be dry as old bones and therefore ignored by everyone because the message sucks. I read as much as I can, distill it to the essence, and read it/play interviews with authors on my show.
So, yeah, with almost three years of this reading on the topic, I can occasionally pass for "astute," even though I am just regurgitating by rote. Thanks for that, BTW.
hey man, that's pretty cool i like some of your podcast titles.. bunkum, gobbledygook and distortion factories
have you looked into the practices of google in the same fashion? i'd call it googledygook..
as of 2009 there were noticeable redirects and site blocks especially when it came to music share blogs. over 30,000 have visibly disappeared and are no more. i may have had as many web pages bookmarked that have all gone 404. music culture with rich comments made with love and fan driven. then came someone out of england called the web sheriff who put out the bounty on anything that smelled of copyright for which i'm certain they've gotten handsomely paid. i saw reference to them the other day again with the coming of the tpp, after global internet control mandate sopa and pipa (i think they should shove their soap up their pipa), but that's just my opinion. i've read musicians claim they get more benefit monetarily out of live performance than they've ever received off royalties from any corporate machine (with some exceptions) and that music sharing actually got them more fandom.
so google, who was trying to play catch up with web content in 2009, and seo searching articles that were 3 years behind, finally caught up to the critical masses in about 2013 and started redirecting and censoring content, to the point of presenting only about 6% of the billions of total existing web postings out there. then there is the cost of running servers that "took out" (negated) a lot of great viable content because of the gouging costs for hosting and internet providers. it's a dog's breakfast really, and the status quo have learned to shove rss feeds in our face from reuters onto device apps to give the public blinders to selected content without interference from third party information.
i'm going to listen to some of your podcasts as i find the time and see where this leads.
i fear for assange unless he too is a puppet bought out by the league as i believe trump is. likewise edward snowden. trump's like jon stewart on the world stage controlled by the elite as a popular host as you've so well painted in your comments about journalists. i doubt there is an ounce of integrity in any of it.
...'cept for me 'n thee, 'n summit oi got me doubts about thee... ))))
Nope. They have no option but denial.
Remember, their outlet (whatever it is) must maintain a facade of integrity, a mask of competency. Admit that they haven't the staff to fully inform their readers/listeners/viewers, and the Emperor just admitted to strolling in full-on Godiva mode. Just admitting weakness affects their bottom line: the rates their advertisers pay.
it's so often sensationalist and then on to the next spectacle
That's always been the case. What happened in the Golden Age is simply that there were too many reporters, so they started digging into stories that previously went undug. Lots of crooked politicians got caught doing what they had done for decades.
When Craig made his list, the Classified Ads sections were empty overnight, and who-boy did those ads bring in the bucks.
When Google and others started more-or-less customizable ads online, the other leg of the stool crumbled. Literally thousands of papers closed after that.
Now the remaining papers have no choice but to go sensational. It's the last style left to them, since they don't really have enough people to do the deep-digging variety of journalism.
Reply
right, "i am the informant. listen to me" - arnold schwartzenneger -- "leave my tortillas alone!" ))
so, then let's just say, it's good entertainment when taken with a grain of salt.. like what are the morons up to today? )))
and for some semblance of the truth it behooves us to look to independent media, although that's probably full of some reverse hegemony too
are you a journalist? or do you just care about the truth?
or both?
you seem fairly astute
ok, so i've come up with a new headline -- ( The Left covers their Right Arse for Hillary by yelling “Fake Jews” ) - Oh, how Soros floats....
.
Reply
Not so fast. It does alright, but it is chronically underfunded. We need to find money to pay professionals if we are going to fix this predicament.
are you a journalist? or do you just care about the truth?
I thought about journalism after college, which was just as the situation started to worsen. Got lucky there.
Everyone cares about the truth. I care that the populace is informed sufficiently to make pragmatic decisions (which they aren't).
Full disclosure: I started reading about media in earnest after I started my podcast, which focuses on advertising. All of our news is commercial; I followed that train of thought and found where it got to the wreck in the tracks caused by the fleeing of ad money.
There's lots of good information out there on all of this. It just tends to be dry as old bones and therefore ignored by everyone because the message sucks. I read as much as I can, distill it to the essence, and read it/play interviews with authors on my show.
So, yeah, with almost three years of this reading on the topic, I can occasionally pass for "astute," even though I am just regurgitating by rote. Thanks for that, BTW.
Reply
i like some of your podcast titles.. bunkum, gobbledygook and distortion factories
have you looked into the practices of google in the same fashion? i'd call it googledygook..
as of 2009 there were noticeable redirects and site blocks especially when it came to music share blogs. over 30,000 have visibly disappeared and are no more. i may have had as many web pages bookmarked that have all gone 404. music culture with rich comments made with love and fan driven. then came someone out of england called the web sheriff who put out the bounty on anything that smelled of copyright for which i'm certain they've gotten handsomely paid. i saw reference to them the other day again with the coming of the tpp, after global internet control mandate sopa and pipa (i think they should shove their soap up their pipa), but that's just my opinion. i've read musicians claim they get more benefit monetarily out of live performance than they've ever received off royalties from any corporate machine (with some exceptions) and that music sharing actually got them more fandom.
so google, who was trying to play catch up with web content in 2009, and seo searching articles that were 3 years behind, finally caught up to the critical masses in about 2013 and started redirecting and censoring content, to the point of presenting only about 6% of the billions of total existing web postings out there. then there is the cost of running servers that "took out" (negated) a lot of great viable content because of the gouging costs for hosting and internet providers. it's a dog's breakfast really, and the status quo have learned to shove rss feeds in our face from reuters onto device apps to give the public blinders to selected content without interference from third party information.
there is a book out there from wikileaks by julian assange called 'when google met wikileaks'
https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
so, let's start there.
i'm going to listen to some of your podcasts as i find the time and see where this leads.
i fear for assange unless he too is a puppet bought out by the league as i believe trump is. likewise edward snowden. trump's like jon stewart on the world stage controlled by the elite as a popular host as you've so well painted in your comments about journalists. i doubt there is an ounce of integrity in any of it.
...'cept for me 'n thee, 'n summit oi got me doubts about thee... ))))
thanks
you're pretty cool
glad to get to know you
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment