Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

CEO of New York Times calls for social media to subsidize the mainstream media

«13

Comments

  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    What's your take on fake news?
  • Fenderbender123
    Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,989
    "Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    "Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.

    So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?
  • Fenderbender123
    Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,989
    2001400ex said:

    "Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.

    So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?
    Yes
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    "Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.

    So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?
    Yes
    What about when Obama talks about black lives matter, should the media call him out as being a racist?
  • greenblood
    greenblood Member Posts: 14,572
    edited December 2016
    The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.

    The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.

    For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.
  • Fenderbender123
    Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,989
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    "Real" news needs to do a better job, and stop writing articles about stupid shit like how Trump said something that could be considered racist. Seriously, it's stupid shit like that that's costing them. Knock it off, and start reporting shit that is actually important and informative.

    So what you are saying, is that when Trump says racist shit, the media shouldn't report it? What about when Trump says stupid shit like 3 million illegals voted? Should the media ignore that too?
    Yes
    What about when Obama talks about black lives matter, should the media call him out as being a racist?
    Again, I'd prefer they didn't.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    The point being, like cable, the media has segmented itself into specific demographics based on their agendas. Conservative outlets like Fox News do better because there are fewer of them fighting for half the national viewership, while CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc, have to fight for the other half. The same goes for print media as well, as there is more competition with liberal leaning than conservative leaning print media. Pretty simple.

    The game isn't rigged, media businesses need to align themselves where there's less competition, or provide value that the others don't.

    For the record, this dumb fuck isn't going to convince people to buy the news. Surviving on subscription revenue has been a dying trend for a couple decades. It's all about advertisement revenue. Don't get me wrong, circulation is important, but the circulation revenue shouldn't be.

    It's not "Fox is conservative and the rest of the media outlets are liberal." And there's print media, etc. The media is like the public, about 35% conservative, 35% liberal and 30% in the middle. I do chuckle at simple minded people that listen to Fox, rush, etc. And believe they are fair and balanced and all other media is liberal.

    The reality is, media on both sides chase the shiny object. They go after whatever they think sells and gets people's attention. Not what reality is.