Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to Z80
Re: WGAE: Internet As Primary News Source Threatens Quality, Job said by Z80:The mob wants the truth and old media won't give it to them. The mob have pretty good B.S. detectors and can filter out birther type nuts .... I don't place the same faith in the fickleness of the mob. The reference to "truthers" was just an extreme example. But, that mindset is a matter of degrees. It's a natural human tendency to want to believe what you want to believe.
An example is the recent financial/credit bubble. The mob didn't want to hear that bad times were coming. The party was going so swell! The popularity-driven media didn't report it.
You'll point to some blawgs that reported it to their specialized audience (investors, etc.). But, that doesn't change the fact that the vast majority didn't want to hear it -- and they had eager, popularity-driven "news" sources to tell them what their itching ears wanted to hear.
That's how a mob mindset works. If the mainstream news had reported the "real news" about the bubble, they would have been accused of being anti-Bush. Just another example of "the liberal media." Since the mainstream media didn't report it, then it's proof of "editorial corruption."
Populism works that way. Rationalize everything because it didn't fit what one subset of the mob felt was "popular," therefore the media isn't reporting "what the people really want to hear." In fact, the mainstream media did report what the people wanted to hear ("see no evil, speak no evil."). If the mainstream media reported the evil (how the economy was built on a house of cards), they would have been accused of tearing down Bush's tremendous economic achievements.
That's how populism (the mob) works. It's not really democratic. It's just who can scream the loudest. A group is convinced that their view is the popular one as evidenced by how loud (passionate) they are. Selectively applying how great the mob's BS detectors are when it comes to 20 million blawgs -- while at the same time unable to cope with corruption/bias in mainstream news.
IMO, the above doesn't lead to quality news.
I'm a little concerned that traditional news is being forced to cater more to populism, reducing their news to editorials that produce the most banner-ad hits. As bad as traditional news has been in its own peculiar way, I'm not naive enough to believe things can't get worse.
Having said that, I'm not defending traditional news organizations. I agree that autonomy (removal from market-driven forces) can (and does) lead to corruption.
I just think they're a good counterbalance to popularity-driven "news," where content is driven by the most passionate (not necessarily the most objective). And, the only feasible way for expensive, in-depth journalism to occur.
Mark |
