Tag Archives: News media

Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall

26 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, History, Honor, Information Technology, Journalism, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Stock Market, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Several news organizations have blocked their website content behind paywalls. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post are noteworthy examples. Paywalls are an attempt to force the reader to pay a subscription to access the news articles of the day. The question is what kind of a journalist wants her or his work held captive from the public?

Paywall News Organizations: The Road to Irrelevance

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, and Irrelevant

The thinking of these organizations is that the value of the content behind the paywall will create a desire for the reader to open a wallet and pay them money. The problem with that theory is that information is not ‘owned’ by a news organization, it is only packaged. News is what happens in the world and is reported in the raw on Twitter, Facebook, and all the other free sources on the Internet.

What investor-owned news media attempts to do is make the reader pay for their packaging of the news, not the product itself, and in an age of the Internet, someone else can offer the same product in a different package for free. 

For the writer or journalist that creates the packaging of the news, it means that the public can’t see her or his work…ever. If people can’t see your work, you become irrelevant. The best writer in the world risks becoming invisible when all his or her creative efforts are on a pay-to-read basis.

Even those who are willing to pay for the subscription can’t share an article with others when it is behind a paywall. The benefit of readers discussing a journalist’s work is limited to the subset of those who pay-to-read and in a ‘Share’ world, that is a critical shortfall.

Paying Journalists For Their Work Myth

The organizations that inflict a paywall on the reader and the journalists defend the decision by saying:

Someone has to pay for quality journalism!

But that is a lie. The truth is closer to the statement:

Our investors have to suck as much money out of the work of the journalists!

Note the list of news organizations and, according to Forbes magazine, who owns (as of June 2016) the controlling stake in them.

Behind Hard Paywall (all articles pay-to-read)

  • Wall Street Journal – Billionaires Rupert Murdoch and Lachian Murdoch
  • The Washington Post – Billionaire Jeff Bezos

Behind Soft Paywall (limited free views)

  • New York Times – Billionaire Carlos Slim Helu
  • Wired – Billionaire Donald Newhouse
  • The New Yorker– Billionaire Donald Newhouse

No Paywall

  • Bloomberg Businessweek – Billionaire Michael Bloomberg

The people who control these news organizations don’t need to find new ways to pay journalists. They are just using journalists for greed.

News As Entertainment

Journalism is a philanthropic duty. It is not created to generate profit for investors, it is created to provide information to citizens. The transition from journalism to entertainment is strictly about greed.

Few great journalists become wealthy, but great journalists become the keystone to a great society. The fall of our country can be traced, at least in part, to the fall of journalism. If journalism is about making money then journalists are just prostitutes of news.

An Indictment Against NPR Journalism Standards

22 Monday Jan 2018

Posted by in Aging, Communication, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, Honor, Journalism, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Image, racism, Taxes, Traditional Media, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

National Public Radio’s (NPR) Morning Edition is not alone in the race to lower journalism standards. It is; however, the latest example of how hard-hitting journalism has become a game of tossing softballs to ill-informed people for entertainment and soundbites.

Interview With a Trumpster

Friday morning (19 January 2018) Morning Edition’s Steve Inskeep and Don Gonyea were discussing Gonyea’s report on Donald Trump’s support in southwestern Pennsylvania. Included in his report was a soundbite of an interview with a Trump supporter using the name, Paul Walker:

Trump was not a politician. He did not come up through all the bullcrap and the handshakes and the elbow-rubbing. He came in. And I think it’s a direct approach. I like his twitters (ph). If you watch my Twitter account, I retweet just about everything that he puts out.

Gonyea then implied that people from the coal mining areas like Trump because they believe government regulation is taking away coal mining jobs. The next soundbite was of Republican State Senator Camera Bartolotta who explained the rationale behind Trumpster’s alleged “war on coal” sentiment:

…we have to fight for our jobs… Of course coal mining is different now. Of course you’re not going to need 2,000 coal miners in a coal mine. We’ve got automation. We’ve got machines. We’ve got, you know, better technology. But you know what? We still need coal.

As Gonyea ended his report, Steve Inskeep asked what seemed to be a prepared question for Gonyea:

…people on the left, …anytime we put Trump voters on the air. They ask – why keep interviewing Trump voters? They never change. They’re out of touch. Why? Why? Why?…Why talk to Trump voters?

Gonyea gave what seemed to be a prepared answer:

Well, first, we talk to voters of all kinds – of all stripes…As for the Trump voters, it’s important to know, A, if they’re still with him. But it’s good to hear how they talk about him and how that may change over time, if there are shifts. Is there strong support suddenly?…Also, in states where the vote’s very close, any movement among any voter group can make the difference.

The Indictment against NPR’s Morning Edition

Morning Edition violated basic journalism standards in the following ways:

Most of the information was based on opinion, not fact.

The man using the name, Paul Walker, expressed his opinion. State Senator Camera Bartolotta expressed her opinion of other people’s opinions. 

Walker, said: “Trump’s not a politician.” FACT:  Trump has run for political office many times. Trump has been a political figure for decades.

State Senator Bartolotta explained why Trump supporters feel they have to fight the government for coal mining jobs, then gave reasons why it wasn’t the government stealing coal mining jobs.

None of the opinions expressed were newsworthy.

These opinions are typical opinions of Trump supporters. The apparent news was that Trump supporters have the same opinions as they have always had. It is the classic dog bites man story. 

Information was meaningless.

The entire story was based on uninformed and/or incorrect opinions. The story was not exposing the lack of facts by the people interviewed but instead legitimized inaccurate and/or uninformed opinion. 

End Didn’t Justify the Story

The exchange between Inskeep and Gonyea seemed to be an attempt to justify poor journalism. Uniformed opinions are not news. They don’t add to the debate, and to focus on inaccurate opinion rather than fact leads people to believe that their opinion is valid regardless of how uninformed, racist, or inappropriate it is to be expressed. It encourages people to become more extremist in order to attract the attention of the media.

*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*

Trumpster Babble Shorthand

Babble #1 – “Trump’s a straight shooter” = He doesn’t research or listen to people, he just says the first thing to come into his head.

Babble #2 – “Trump speaks for the little guy.” = Trump says what uneducated racist is thinking.

Babble #3 – “We have to stop giving all our money to the government.” = I don’t want to pay for the privilege of living in the United States of America. 

Babble #4 – “Trump is keeping people from coming to America and stealing our jobs.” = I’m racist so I can blame people of color for taking jobs I would never apply for because they’re beneath me, or far beyond my qualifications.

Babble #5 – “Trump’s not a politician” = He’s inexperienced. 

Babble #6 – “We need jobs!” = We need jobs that pay lots of money to people in a small town with few skills and only a high school degree…or less.

Journalists Using Uneducated, Uninformed Opinion As Fact

16 Saturday Dec 2017

Posted by in Aging, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Higher Education, Journalism, Politics, racism, Religion, Science, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

There is a growing crisis of legitimate news organizations interviewing an uninformed person and presenting it as news. The person-on-street interview is justified by journalists as a citizen’s opinion, using the logic that all citizens are equally informed and knowledgeable; therefore, his or her opinion is valid.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.

Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry

However, an opinion is limited by the person’s real experience and knowledge. Few people are qualified to speak intelligently on significant topics like foreign policy, and economic and legal issues. An unqualified person should not be giving their opinion on local or national news without clarifying his or her background on the subject matter.

Journalists Going For Entertainment, Not Fact

The problem of unqualified opinions being presented as news has become more severe as the opinions have become more outrageous. Trump supporters have had an entertainment value for some news organizations because their statements are often contrary to known facts and/or logical reasoning.

We do not go to first graders and ask them to design the best and most effective educational methods because they have no qualifications or skills to offer an opinion. They may have an opinion, but having recess all day long is not a legitimate answer to the question.

Opinions of uneducated, uninformed citizens destroy democracy because it circumvents intelligent discussion. An irrational person’s opinion does not lead to a rational debate of the issues.