• Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I think we need different incentives than profit when it comes to information sharing. Maybe a profit motive isn’t the best thing for a “news” source to have. Especially when ratings seem to be tied to ragebait and hate.

    • WraithGear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Journalists and editors need to eat. And the problem is if the government gets involved and funds it, well let’s just say that ends badly. Not even the post office is allowed to run without being fucked with by republicans, and then they are somehow forced to turn a profit, when they are also forced to run in a way that is antithetical to making profit based decisions. And now you have the government deciding for the news, what is biased. And no more reporting on government officials that aren’t just puff pieces.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s not impossible, however. While the BBC indeed has a lot of problems on its own, it’s actually been relatively well separated from the British government. They’ve had more issues with covering up for their own celebrities like Jimmy Savile, rather than covering for the government.

        But yes, journalists need to eat and they’re being paid so little that it results in the kind of media landscape we have now. We no longer have a host of long-form investigative journalists who are given months to research and develop stories. The 24 hour news cycle has reduced everything to minimal impact and journalists having to pump out stories without real depth.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Ok…. And you assume this will be true… if an American government… who established a Russian asset as president, is attempting to defund private schools so that they can give money to certain religious orgs and push a Christian message, who is trying to privatize the post office, and who refuse to answer to war crimes is a good environment to take control of the news media?

            • WraithGear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              I didn’t attempt to. Just saying. You said it wasn’t impossible for government owed news media to dutifully report against the government. Maybe not, but our country’s kinda stacked the deck against that

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Yeah the issue is the profit motive encompasses all industries and forces them to a race to the bottom. Innovation is eaten alive for profits, nothing goes back into the company, and the shareholders reign supreme. This is simply an example of what capitalism does to journalism, nothing more.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’m not sure why we need share holders at all. Not sure what function they serve. A business can remain active without the stock market if they produce value. They could innovate and not necessarily be wholly motivated by profit above all else.