Fluff and journalism

Forums › Off topic › Fluff and journalism

Rikkitic

Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3715

Subscriber

Topic # 199254 10-Aug-2016 11:52

I have just viewed the excellent video by John Oliver on the decline of serious journalism. Thanks to eracode for posting this valuable link (http://www.cnet.com/news/politics-vs-cute-cats-john-oliver-warns-about-real-journalisms-demise/). It is funny and informative and I highly recommend it to anyone who cares at all about this sort of thing.

I think this is an important issue and it deserves its own thread. It is easy to imagine that the dumbing down of our media is a problem specific to New Zealand, but clearly it is bigger than that. The question is what can be done to salvage traditional quality journalism, or whether anything should be done at all.

Some ‘uncommercial’ activities are accepted as so vital to the proper functioning of democratic society that they are subsidised by public money. Libraries are a good example of this. There are many others.

In some countries, such as the Netherlands, newspapers also receive subsidies to keep them viable. There is also a requirement that new buildings must include a budget for art, though I’m not certain exactly how this works. I believe that quality journalism, including and especially investigative journalism, is an essential good that should be protected and nurtured. It is too important to be left to the vagaries of commercial media, especially in the digital click-bait era. There needs to be a place for quality public broadcasters and other media, supported by public funds. TVNZ 7 was well on the way to becoming such a public service broadcaster. Unfortunately, our myopic government and incompetent Minister of Broadcasting felt that the five million dollars this would have cost was better spent on things like a pointless flag referendum.

Serious media are in serious trouble here. That means the rest of us are in trouble as well. Fairfax and the NZ Herald do not need each other. They need the support of the New Zealand public so they can put aside the fluff and fulfil the vital role of the fourth estate. If that means subsidising them from a central fund, then so be it. TV 7 or something like it also needs to be brought back. These are my thoughts. What are yours?

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

12872 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6079

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1607524 10-Aug-2016 12:01

Journalism, News services, publications are business ventures. The survival of these depends on their revenue from either cover charges (seldom covers the cost of distribution), paywall charges or advertising. Their ability to draw these revenues depends on their popularity,

like it or not what these organisations are publishing is what the vast majority of their readers/buyers want. The circulation and readership surveys that the advertising agencies etc receive, e.g McNairs reveal these metrics and the agencies and media organisations respond accordingly.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

DarthKermit

4401 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2404

Trusted

Reply # 1608525 10-Aug-2016 13:00

I love John Oliver and his sense of humour. He's great at getting the Yanks to laugh at themselves.

After watching that video. I have one word to say: "tronc"

tdgeek

13228 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2371

Trusted

Reply # 1608529 10-Aug-2016 13:03

MikeB4:

Journalism, News services, publications are business ventures. The survival of these depends on their revenue from either cover charges (seldom covers the cost of distribution), paywall charges or advertising. Their ability to draw these revenues depends on their popularity,

like it or not what these organisations are publishing is what the vast majority of their readers/buyers want. The circulation and readership surveys that the advertising agencies etc receive, e.g McNairs reveal these metrics and the agencies and media organisations respond accordingly.

That is exactly it. The world has changed. What used to be goods that lasted for years and years, last much less, we run a disposable, short term lifestyle now. Same with TV programs, movies, its all hot today, gone tomorrow stuff in man cases, apart from a few gems.

This does mean that for every example I gave above, there is the rest of us, what the minority of their readers/buyers prefer

DarthKermit

4401 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2404

Trusted

Reply # 1608534 10-Aug-2016 13:11

There's an absolutely astute user comment if you go to YouTube and watch this:

"Funny, isn't it, that our world needs Clark Kent a lot more than Superman."

+1 million.

Rikkitic

Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3715

Subscriber

Reply # 1608538 10-Aug-2016 13:17

tdgeek:

MikeB4:

Journalism, News services, publications are business ventures. The survival of these depends on their revenue from either cover charges (seldom covers the cost of distribution), paywall charges or advertising. Their ability to draw these revenues depends on their popularity,

like it or not what these organisations are publishing is what the vast majority of their readers/buyers want. The circulation and readership surveys that the advertising agencies etc receive, e.g McNairs reveal these metrics and the agencies and media organisations respond accordingly.

That is exactly it. The world has changed. What used to be goods that lasted for years and years, last much less, we run a disposable, short term lifestyle now. Same with TV programs, movies, its all hot today, gone tomorrow stuff in man cases, apart from a few gems.

This does mean that for every example I gave above, there is the rest of us, what the minority of their readers/buyers prefer

Gee, I'm a lemming. All those other lemmings are rushing over the cliff. Guess I better do that, too.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

Rikkitic

Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3715

Subscriber

Reply # 1608539 10-Aug-2016 13:18

DarthKermit:

There's an absolutely astute user comment if you go to YouTube and watch this:

"Funny, isn't it, that our world needs Clark Kent a lot more than Superman."

+1 million.

Agree. That is exceptionally insightful.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

Sideface

4209 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2445

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1608540 10-Aug-2016 13:21

Rikkitic:

I have just viewed the excellent video by John Oliver on the decline of serious journalism. Thanks to eracode for posting this valuable link (http://www.cnet.com/news/politics-vs-cute-cats-john-oliver-warns-about-real-journalisms-demise/). It is funny and informative and I highly recommend it to anyone who cares at all about this sort of thing.

<snip>

Highly recommended

For #investifarted see 5:50.

I love new words

Sideface

sbiddle

26936 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6379

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1608581 10-Aug-2016 13:42

As a news junkie I dread 99% of what's "news" these days.

The problem however is that clickbait stories drive traffic volumes and people love celebrity gossip. You can't really blame the media for focussing on such "news" when it's what the vast majority of people want.

Rikkitic

Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3715

Subscriber

Reply # 1608586 10-Aug-2016 13:46

sbiddle:

As a news junkie I dread 99% of what's "news" these days.

The problem however is that clickbait stories drive traffic volumes and people love celebrity gossip. You can't really blame the media for focussing on such "news" when it's what the vast majority of people want.

Yeah, that argument keeps coming up. I'm not saying that kind of stuff should be banned but surely there is a way to ensure the survival of serious journalism. Why not subsidise it if that is what it takes?

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

wellygary

3308 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 888

Reply # 1608600 10-Aug-2016 14:00

Rikkitic: Why not subsidise it if that is what it takes?

We already are,

Last year the Govt provided over $30 million to Radio NZ, $16 million to Maori TV and around $100 million for other Radio and TV programmes, additioanally it has over $250 million invested in TVNZ.

So the question is probably not one of "The government should fund it", but rather

Does what is currently funded meet with your (and others) Reithian Values..

Rikkitic

Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3715

Subscriber

Reply # 1608613 10-Aug-2016 14:26

One person supports this post

wellygary:

Rikkitic: Why not subsidise it if that is what it takes?

We already are,

Last year the Govt provided over $30 million to Radio NZ, $16 million to Maori TV and around $100 million for other Radio and TV programmes, additioanally it has over $250 million invested in TVNZ.

So the question is probably not one of "The government should fund it", but rather

Does what is currently funded meet with your (and others) Reithian Values..

Some of it does. RNZ could certainly do with more funding, while Maori TV has some decent programming, but one-off funded stuff from New Zealand on Air tends to get submerged in all the mindless crap surrounding it. I think the money that goes to that and TVNZ could better be invested in a dedicated public service broadcaster like TV 7. When you have quality programming concentrated in one place it tends to acquire critical mass. When it is scattered amidst other programming, it gets overwhelmed. In any case, this does nothing to help print journalism, which also deserves support.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

MikeAqua

4952 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2010

Reply # 1608657 10-Aug-2016 15:08

The internet is about clicks not quality if you don't pay for news what do you expect?

It's an imitation engine.

Mike

Loaf

45 posts

Geek

Reply # 1608674 10-Aug-2016 15:31

I used to like reading Stuff but it has really gone down the crapper in the last couple of years, and it was hardly a jewel to begin with. Lots of bloggy click-bait, inaccuracies, and tabloid trash, and those awful ads that cover the entire page if you mouse over them. Comment section has become a rage fest of trolling and complaints about the articles being dog food. A few of the forums I frequent have new topics dedicated to, or including, regular discussion about Stuff posting garbage, and I see there is a topic here too.

I wonder what will happen... will it improve, worsen, or is this what we have to accept as the the new (much lower) standard. There must be an audience for it because the sites do well enough to continue... although there is a sense that the media organisations in New Zealand are trying to desperately evolve to something new, and in my opinion, my more Americanised.

olivernz

154 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 32

Reply # 1608691 10-Aug-2016 15:37

RNZ is a perfect example. RNZ is the only half-way acceptable reporting left (newspapers, radio and TV included). Why? Because they DON'T depend on earning money from advertising or the glorious magnifiscense of some supreme oligarch. Yes, you can argue if they are slanted or not but at least they spend time on actually investigating a story.

News is, in general, dead. It's opinion pieces sometimes corroborated by fact. This is intentional and a direct consequence of our behaviour. We support low IQ and free. We voluntarily conscede to TPPA, security, politics,... it's all just too difficult. I'd just rather talk about the Snapper quota.

Democracy comes with obligations. Actual effort has to be spent to upkeep it. This effort is mainly fuelled by good reporting and investigation, followed by people standing up to injustice. We have generations now that couldn't care less as long as the sun comes up the next morning. Reporting isn't valued. Nevermind standing up for something (I'll expclude Pokemon Go here!).

So we're reaping what we sowed since the mid 80ies. It will need a revolution and/or a world war to change the course we're on.

And -by the way- anyone like me saying something like this I immediately stamped a leftist/communist heretic. The only reason John Oliver survives is because he sells it as a joke. The US has even gone so far to revisit actual news by packaging it in a TV show (Newsweek) so they could say what needed to be said! Have a look at something like "Democracy Now". They give a sh*t and it seems they invest some time trying to get to the bottom of things. I also like taht they don't use makeup or junior prom hostesses to present the news. But in general they aren't given the time of day. And that's where we're at. You can present real reporting as humor at best. Everything else is deamonised.

Doesn't anyone have that nagging feeling sometime when reading the DomPost/stuff that reading the toilet paper might be more worthwhile?

Sorry for the rant. Touched a nerve.

tdgeek

13228 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2371

Trusted

Reply # 1608764 10-Aug-2016 17:08

Rikkitic:

wellygary:

Rikkitic: Why not subsidise it if that is what it takes?

We already are,

Last year the Govt provided over $30 million to Radio NZ, $16 million to Maori TV and around $100 million for other Radio and TV programmes, additioanally it has over $250 million invested in TVNZ.

So the question is probably not one of "The government should fund it", but rather

Does what is currently funded meet with your (and others) Reithian Values..

Some of it does. RNZ could certainly do with more funding, while Maori TV has some decent programming, but one-off funded stuff from New Zealand on Air tends to get submerged in all the mindless crap surrounding it. I think the money that goes to that and TVNZ could better be invested in a dedicated public service broadcaster like TV 7. When you have quality programming concentrated in one place it tends to acquire critical mass. When it is scattered amidst other programming, it gets overwhelmed. In any case, this does nothing to help print journalism, which also deserves support.

True, but as stated by some here, thats what todays public wants. The option is then for a news provider, print and video, to do proper news, and that will require a fee as it doesnt roll in todays world. User pays.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5