Dept. of You Are Kidding, Right?

[kaffy_r]

Gee, D'ya Think?

I pay occasional attention to a LinkedIn discussion group for online reporters and editors. It doesn't often have much to commend it, and today's post was ... well, here's the title: "As Newsrooms Have Layoffs, Content Could Suffer."

No shit, Sherlock. 

*goes to bang head rhythmically against wall*

Comments

[heliopausa]

:( Funny, but not at all funny. :( We're going to have to invent a lot of things all over again.

[kaffy_r]

I think what I hate is the idea that people don't know the history of my business, and seem so intent on reinventing the wheel. But it seems as if that's inevitable. Gah.

[heliopausa]

What I hate is the idea that power-brokers know the history of your (vital, fundamental-to-freedom) business all too well, and hence want it dismantled in favour of pre-chewed press-releases. (see also: intimidation of journos in many places.)

[kaffy_r]

Oh lord - you are so correct on that. Years ago, Ben Bagdikian wrote a book about the growing corporatization of journalism/newspapers, and he was depressingly prescient, pointing out that as more and bigger corporations owned first more, and then fewer, journalism outlets (fewer by virtue of them shutting them down), democracy suffered.

It continues to suffer. I'm in what some people don't think of as a major branch of journalism, community journalism - something I disagree with, of course - and I've seen my area suffer an unmitigated and unceasing deliberate hostile erosion as far back as the late 80s and early 90s,

[heliopausa]

"deliberate"- yes. and worse to come, I fear, hence the need to re-invent.
I'm currently looking at https://theconversation.com/au for some of the content I used to find in newspapers. (I'm not currently located in a place where I can easily get major English-language newspapers - but the quality of content has gone down in the ones I used to go to in any case.)

[kaffy_r]

Aha, this is what you meant by reinvention (I was a little slow yesterday.)

This jibes so much with what maruad says over on my LJ page, and it's a damned shame, because when you've reached the point where you essentially splinter your news sources, you also splinter news readers/viewers/consumers into discrete groups. And members of those groups thereafter rarely or never are exposed to other types of news, or other opinions, or other views of news issues. They self-select out of running across unexpected news in a way one wasn't able to do when one a) had a huge daily paper or regular weekly paper in hand, or when one watched a long general news program: one was going to run into something unexpected on the way to finding the news one wanted, and that helped keep everyone educated.

[heliopausa]

Part of what I meant - I also think we need to think outside the internet.
I don't think it's necessarily as troubling as you think in the way you suggest; the link I gave wasn't to addressed to only sectional interests in the same way that a sports blog or film blog might be.
Also, huge daily papers have AlwAys pretty much sorted readers into discrete groups.
But it is seriously troubling in that people are so appallingly easily manipulated (at the level of emotion, that is, not necessarily at the level of ongoing action).

Well, for a lighter(?) snippet of related news: R. Murdoch has just bought the National Geographic. (Not as much of a slide as you might think; their publications have been shoddy for years. But stand by for beautiful photographs "proving" anything R. Murdoch wants to have proved.)

[yamx]

In other news: Water is Wet!

[kaffy_r]

And there you have it, folks - bang, spot on the nose!

(Also? It's good to see you!)

[thisbluespirit]

Well, you know, someone's got to state the obviously, I suppose... ;-)

[kaffy_r]

Heh ... while I often take on the job of Captain Obvious, this headline took the cake for someone who has survived layoff after layoff after company sale after company sale. Argh.

[maruad.livejournal.com]

I wonder how much of the slack created by the decontenting newspapers is being picked up by specialty blogs. I have recently started paying a minimal sum to read a Pittsburgh based sports blog because they signed the former editor of a fan based sports blog that I followed for several years. It is now one of the two best sites, imo, for following NFL football from the perspective of a Pittsburgh Steelers fan. The other site is a new one run by a couple of fans who had been stellar contributors to the old fan blog.

I go to these sites because there isn't any newspaper/tv/radio site that offers as much meaningful analysis and insight on the topic. I don't need the useless factoid journalism (not you btw) that seems to abound for a topic where I am already conversant with the basic issues and background. I wonder how long before more specialty sites take flight for various readers.

[kaffy_r]

What you describe is one of the things that many journalists and fans of keeping the general public well informed have feared for some time. People are no longer looking to newspapers or periodicals for the information they want; they go to niche publications or sites to get it. And in self-selecting out of general news offerings, they may get what they want (or, more dangerously, what they want to read/see), and miss the opportunity to get the news they need.

Consider this. How many of we older folk discovered stories and news we didn't expect to find while turning to page 4 to read the last half of a page 1 story and seeing that story we weren't looking for on page 3? How often can that happen now, when people know what they want and go directly there? They'll never read that story on page 3 - and in missing it, may have missed something important to their future, or to their understanding of their neighborhood, their town, their country, the world.

I don't know the answer to that question, but I fear it.

[maruad.livejournal.com]

I don't know how it will work for the general public. Being retired and not having enough to read, I read the offerings of several news sites (including those that do local coverage) but I know what you mean. The off chance that a small article or ad that will catch my attention and drag me into an unexplored area of knowledge.

[kaffy_r]

I read the offerings of several news sites (including those that do local coverage

I salute you! Seriously, I really salute you; I wish more people did that. Hell, I wish I did it more!

[maruad.livejournal.com]

It is partly lethargy and boredom... I am too lazy to get up and do something useful but I get bored just sitting there and even video games get dull after awhile so there you go. Less worthy of being saluted as me needed to get out more.

[sallymn.livejournal.com]

I would NEVER have thought of that on my own...

[kaffy_r]

Heh ... hurrah for sallymn, bringing the snark just when it's needed!

[liadt]

Ha! I guess some people will write anything to stop their site becoming a cobweb.

[kaffy_r]

Probably. But I'd rather have no readers than no clue (or no shame, given the sad probability that whoever wrote the commentary knows the answer damn well.) Ah, well ....

[a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com]

OMFG...

*Helpless eye-rolling*

[kaffy_r]

inorite?

Gah.