I choose death
Journalism Is Dead.
- Thread starter HotHamBoy
- Start date
- Status
I choose death
Journalism is corrupted to the point where I don't see how it recovers. That is my arguement. I summed it up succinctly with an eye-catching title, using the same tactics that media outlets use.
It's almost as if yellow journalism hasn't existed for a hundred plus years.
But how can you pin that on a single generation? My parents stopped subscribing to newspapers and magazines, too. They are in their 50s.
entremet
Member
Exactly.
This isn't a new thing. More idiots can be journalists because the barrier of entry is lower.
Support decent journalism.
Joe Schmoe isn't a journalist. Joe Schmoe's getting it from a random site that is getting traffic and ad money. One or two of the major news outlets just had a story on this the other day.
The shares on social media only drive people back to the sources, even if a source isn't initially claimed.
Please, son, that's not what we are discussing here. Take your condescension elsewhere
Except when Joe Schmoe *is* the source, like the CNN Porn story.
They're already using one.
Why do you think Drudge Report looks like something straight out of 1997 in 2016?
I don't think journalism is dead at all. There are just a LOT more voices than there used to be, so naturally there will be better and worse ones. Cable news (the industry that has gotten the most hate lately) has always been a hybrid of news and entertainment.
There are several superb publications that the OP seems to be ignoring - BBC, NPR and the New York Times, for example.
There are several superb publications that the OP seems to be ignoring - BBC, NPR and the New York Times, for example.
I'm not ignoring those publications, I've covered them with the bit about people discrediting them because they don't conform to their worldviews.
TheSpoiler
Member
But such a corruption has existed far before your time. Read up on yellow journalism. That really should have killed it off, but it didn't.
It's the ebb and flow, and social media has made it far more significant this time around. During the era of Geocities sites, you'd have all kinds of places pretending to be legit sources of real news until places like Snoopes and co. started striking things down.
The biggest issue is that this time the solution, or awareness, isn't keeping up. Part of that has to do with social media, and another part is the terrible timing of the election. The fake news stories has been a problem for social media for years, and since FB changed their algorithm to include only things you want to see or people you interact with (alongside gatekeeping the ability to show your story unless you pay money) and the overuse of targeting, it started spreading false news and bad blogs more and more.
There's something to be said of these places that push out news as fast as possible, and big places keep doing it. But the usual solution (which would have been people moving to other reputable sources) didn't keep up with the bombardment of social media.
So, a slip up happens in the news world. That's going to be a thing for a while. Major news stations aren't impervious, and they never will be. However, the issue lies in visibility to those places that don't deserve the attention, not necessarily real journalistic outlets.
Edit: And while you don't want to discuss it and don't think it's relevant, yellow journalism is directly related to this because it's the same methodology when it comes down to it: the spread of false information for hits or to inflict damage/sway public opinion. You can't divorce those two things.
Joe Schmoe still isn't a journalist. Joe Schmoe is the source, and the news organization that truly broadcast it worldwide, are the ones to blame.
Holy shit with this yellow journalism talk, like I didn't go to high school, too.
The communications world we live in today is a totally different beast from back when people only got their news from their local paper and radio broadcast.
TheSpoiler
Member
Almost as if I covered that in my actual post!
Again, though, the method is the same, but the vehicle is not. It happened before when internet reporting started becoming a thing.
Which is true, but some of these are declining and struggling to survive. Earlier this year the NYT was just barely profitable.
NPR at least gets donations, and I don't know how much BBC relies on ad revenue (or if at all). If the NYT goes under, it's going to be a sad day for all of us.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Kinda, well.. yeah.
Was hearing a conversation about food critics and what they cover.. and my argument is who really reads them anymore... it's basically a dead industry. There was a point in time, years ago that the internet was full of good info, great blogs, etc... then FB and Twitter took it all over... the good forums/blogs basically died... print media basically is dead... so it's all copy pasta articles done by low paid workers... almost no real reporting.
So false info is spread like wildfire.. and high quality journalism or actual editing by professionals is dead.
PeskyToaster
Member
Remember the Maine, to hell with Spain!
Wag
Member
The only time I thought they were showing hardcore porn on CNN was when I was in the hospital, doped up on morphine, recovering from back surgery. (true story)
Brooke Baldwin in a 3-way is hot.
John Kowalski
Banned
I don't know quite what to take of this, there's been so much ado about bad reactionary journalism, and it's hard to perceive exactly what has happened. Has there actually been an increase in poor journalism, or have people just gained the ability to perceive it? There's obviously still good journalism being done, hasn't it increased too? For how much easier contemporary media makes it easier to make bad journalism, it also facilitates great journalism and surely some have learned to do it well at least half as much as those who haven't. Where is that?
But there's something else i'm kinda scared of, and it's not that fake news is a thing that exists. But that people need to believe that they exist and that they are the dominant force in the world because they cannot digest recent events and what lies they have been made to believe by their own inability to perceive things truly and courageously. No offence.
But there's something else i'm kinda scared of, and it's not that fake news is a thing that exists. But that people need to believe that they exist and that they are the dominant force in the world because they cannot digest recent events and what lies they have been made to believe by their own inability to perceive things truly and courageously. No offence.
Yeah. People definitely never spread rumors and shot the shit at bars before the internet. Back in the good old days, people read the one paper in their town and it only ran the truth and nobody ever talked spread misinformation while talking about current events.
That's why none my friends spent hours and hours tryna unlock Sonic in Super Smash Bros after some kid swore it was possible at recess back in the day.
That's why none my friends spent hours and hours tryna unlock Sonic in Super Smash Bros after some kid swore it was possible at recess back in the day.
The internet is a godsend.
No one gets news from news sources. It's all second hand. Years ago this would happen with random people spreading false info to each other (I heard that...). Hell this has been happening since ancient civilization. Only few actually spend time reading the source material. I wouldnt be surprised if a large percentage of people on this forum get the news from the forum itself as opposed to reading the washington post daily
In the 90s teachers would try to get students to get used to reading the newspaper so they'd actually know whats really going on. I understand why now: can't trust anyone since everyone has an agenda. Now all the rumors and misinformation is traded instantly online, around the world, to millions of people. And laws havent caught up to be able to handle it. People can slander and libel in all new ways and there isnt much legal recourse to prevent it at the moment
In the 90s teachers would try to get students to get used to reading the newspaper so they'd actually know whats really going on. I understand why now: can't trust anyone since everyone has an agenda. Now all the rumors and misinformation is traded instantly online, around the world, to millions of people. And laws havent caught up to be able to handle it. People can slander and libel in all new ways and there isnt much legal recourse to prevent it at the moment
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Journalism should follow pro wrestling: "protect the business."
As in, don't let amateurs ruin or define your profession. Keep it to people with talent and honest passion or else it dies. Look at this shit race to the bottom and lowest common denominator mess we're dealing with now that we have 24/7 news and anyone can do this.
As in, don't let amateurs ruin or define your profession. Keep it to people with talent and honest passion or else it dies. Look at this shit race to the bottom and lowest common denominator mess we're dealing with now that we have 24/7 news and anyone can do this.
Spiritwalker
Member
It's doing pretty well in my country.
Psychoward
Banned
...how does that have anything to do with journalism becoming less revered? A lot of the people calling out biased media aren't even millenials.
journalism isn't better or worse than it's ever been.
issue is what the majority of people recognize as "journalism"
Psychoward
Banned
But milennials
What does calling out the bias have to do with any of this?
The issue the OP seems to be talking about is credibility with regards to research and checking facts.
dreamcastmaster
Banned
You died, failing to get into digital distribution more like. Your readers wanted the content in a form that was convenient to their lifestyle.
I hope you do well, we need good teachers. I feel like public education is on the bottom of our priority list.
Respect, it's hard and thankless work.
If he's a journalist, he's used to that.
RareFantasy64
Member
I agree
As a journalist for 15+ years, I'm not bailing out. Someone has to stay here and do something right.
Just like so many other things, journalism has been and will need to hit rock bottom before it can become something better. I feel like the rush of "fake news" story headlines will be a wake up call.
I understand we always will have those who only want the news that caters to what they already believe, but I also know that there are plenty of people out there who still want quality news and journalism.
Even as that number shrinks and grows over time, there will still be a subset of us who want the truth. That's why I remain a journalist and that's why I get disappointed when I see so many give up (most recently millennials in my newsroom who turn to teaching).
Just like so many other things, journalism has been and will need to hit rock bottom before it can become something better. I feel like the rush of "fake news" story headlines will be a wake up call.
I understand we always will have those who only want the news that caters to what they already believe, but I also know that there are plenty of people out there who still want quality news and journalism.
Even as that number shrinks and grows over time, there will still be a subset of us who want the truth. That's why I remain a journalist and that's why I get disappointed when I see so many give up (most recently millennials in my newsroom who turn to teaching).
IISANDERII
Member
I think you need a 'Can't beat them, join them' approach here, and double down on it.
-The new iPhone 7 can be used underwater, but only 50% of people have enough capacitance in their fingers to send a text message! Are you one of them?
-Scientists say drinking urine is the missing elixir for weight loss!
-"I know where you live" is the secret password to get out of trouble when pulled over by the police!
-Paint Swastikas on your house to receive $400/month from the little known 'Public Nationalism' fund of initiated by president Trump!
-The new iPhone 7 can be used underwater, but only 50% of people have enough capacitance in their fingers to send a text message! Are you one of them?
-Scientists say drinking urine is the missing elixir for weight loss!
-"I know where you live" is the secret password to get out of trouble when pulled over by the police!
-Paint Swastikas on your house to receive $400/month from the little known 'Public Nationalism' fund of initiated by president Trump!
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
And here I just subscribed to the New York Times...
Out of curiosity, how much of your newsroom exodus is due to frustrations with standards and how much is due to the pay/workload ratio? I'll be leaving for teaching within the next year as well, and the latter is my primary motivator.
afternoon delight
Member
Gimme The Economist, Foreign Affairs, and The Week or give me death! Hear ye hear ye!
onadesertedisland
Member
It's not so much a journalism problem, but a lack of critical thinking and skepticism from the reader. Lazy readers that take anything at face value, especially when it confirms their bias, are to blame.
We imagine some great past of journalistic integrity and people putting faith in credible organizations and scorning obvious con artists when i doubt this was ever the case. Perhaps the American news media was of a better breed in the post-war era, but like other features of the post-war era (such as near-perpetual full employment and declining income inequality) are an aberration of history instead of the way things should be. "Remember the Maine" was the rallying cry that led us to the Spanish-American war over what historians are pretty sure was an accidental gunpowder magazine explosion. Even in the post 9/11 era, Bush had to work harder than that to make a case for the Iraq War.
Society muddles on because the crap is forgotten.
Society muddles on because the crap is forgotten.
No. This is a byproduct of "tailored" social media feeds. I'be been pissed about them since they started with Facebook and I will continue to be pissed about them.
- Status