undefined | Better HN

0 pointsuntog8y ago0 comments

There's a meaningful difference between journalists and advertisers. I know it's fashionable to bash "the media" but I wouldn't want to live in a world without journalism. Advertising I could take or leave.

0 comments

RickS8y ago

> There's a meaningful difference between journalists and advertisers.

In the dictionary, sure. In reality, for as long as advertisers are how journalists get paid, that difference is whittling towards nil.

untogOP8y ago

That's pretty obviously not true. I didn't see advertisers covering the mass shooting in Las Vegas, Harvey Weinstein or tax reform, to pick just three things from the last year.

RickS8y ago

I am not saying "journalists only cover what advertisers will cover".

I am saying "journalist's standards are increasingly coming second to the generation of advertising revenue".

Once-reptutable media empires embed Outbrain widgets and generate fad-focused, celebrity-focused clickbait garbage because it makes them money. They are not doing this for Journalism's sake. They are doing it for revenue from advertisers. I understand that this is an ancient phenomenon (PG's "suits back in style" essay comes to mind), but I have observed the scale and shallowness of the phenomenon worsening as the coffers get lighter at the news orgs.

For that reason, I am arguing that the "meaningfulness" of the difference between advertisers and journalists appears to be waning.

chiefalchemist8y ago

Um. Not really. The media covers that which gets clicks / eyeballs. That gets turned into revenue via advertisers.

When you gather news from enough sources you start to see patterns in what gets a lot of attention, and what doesn't.

Long to short, you're naive if you don't think there's a straight line been the mainstrean news media and advertisers.

Note: The mainstream news media should also not be confused with journalism. The reasons are obvious.

pjkundert8y ago

We’ve lived in a world without “journalism” for, I would guess, decades? The internet is slowly giving us the option of journalism back, but it’s going to take time to reanimate that corpse.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

RickS8y ago

> There's a meaningful difference between journalists and advertisers.

In the dictionary, sure. In reality, for as long as advertisers are how journalists get paid, that difference is whittling towards nil.

untogOP8y ago

That's pretty obviously not true. I didn't see advertisers covering the mass shooting in Las Vegas, Harvey Weinstein or tax reform, to pick just three things from the last year.

RickS8y ago

I am not saying "journalists only cover what advertisers will cover".

I am saying "journalist's standards are increasingly coming second to the generation of advertising revenue".

For that reason, I am arguing that the "meaningfulness" of the difference between advertisers and journalists appears to be waning.

chiefalchemist8y ago

Um. Not really. The media covers that which gets clicks / eyeballs. That gets turned into revenue via advertisers.

When you gather news from enough sources you start to see patterns in what gets a lot of attention, and what doesn't.

Long to short, you're naive if you don't think there's a straight line been the mainstrean news media and advertisers.

Note: The mainstream news media should also not be confused with journalism. The reasons are obvious.

pjkundert8y ago

We’ve lived in a world without “journalism” for, I would guess, decades? The internet is slowly giving us the option of journalism back, but it’s going to take time to reanimate that corpse.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse