General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe truest thing you will read today.
https://bsky.app/profile/infomercial.bsky.social/post/3larg5di2z22p
peregrinus
(336 posts)I saw that he was crying/begging for help yesterday and claimed that auditors were coming in his studio and selling off the equipment today. Can he regroup or will all future business endeavors be subject to asset forfeiture?
Bluetus
(176 posts)of paying for it.
dchill
(40,557 posts)And it's not truth, either.
brush
(57,751 posts)Bettie
(17,175 posts)all of whom are right wing, so the "truth" isn't usually truth either.
live love laugh
(14,451 posts)CrispyQ
(38,366 posts)That's a bumper sticker I saw many years ago. Another one I saw & liked was "Tax cuts don't matter if you don't have a job."
OverBurn
(1,094 posts)ECL213
(314 posts)littlemissmartypants
(25,635 posts)littlemissmartypants
(25,635 posts)There are several ways around pay walls.
And...
I just don't believe people know how to think as well as they used to say, ten years ago.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the masses when they are bombarded with propaganda and don't know how to think.
If thinking was more like urination we might not be in this mess.
Fluid, produces urges, can be examined on sight for problems with health...
People don't do abstract brain things anymore, apparently.
❤️
OldBaldy1701E
(6,415 posts)calimary
(84,445 posts)To get people hooked in. With lies that reinforce everything they want to believe in.
And some of em dont even feel it when its happening. Pox Noise glitzes it up really nice n fancy, with lots of fancy decorative women thrown in - to look at, too, and these chumps dont feel a thing.
Unfortunately, their stupidity and gullibility fucks over ALL of America.
Fiendish Thingy
(18,620 posts)They consistently sanewashed Trump for the whole election campaign.
That is a bigger problem than their paywall.
soldierant
(7,922 posts)Some trtrh, but so mixed with "normalization" that it's almost unrecognizable
Ligyron
(7,904 posts)MomInTheCrowd
(331 posts)is the Anti-FoxNewsMaxOANN, you can cut the cord and get off cable and go OverTheAir altogether.
markodochartaigh
(2,172 posts)Fox is not free. I think that cable companies must pay Fox to carry Fox's content. If I understand it correctly, everyone who has cable which carries Fox is, in effect, subsidizing Fox because the cable companies do not charge separately for Fox.
So Fox isn't free, it is just that, all bundled up, cable subscribers do not realize that they are paying for it.
LittleGirl
(8,452 posts)Progressive dog
(7,244 posts)and I can't just opt out of Fox. Of course, I don't have to watch it.
And isn't Fox the default station on the television at our military bases?
I remember reading this years ago and thinking it was an incredibly irresponsible policy.
LeftInTX
(30,135 posts)lastlib
(24,953 posts)Uh-huhhhh...............
3Hotdogs
(13,440 posts)Renew Deal
(82,938 posts)But I get the point
Steven Maurer
(493 posts)KT2000
(20,879 posts)to get on streaming services. Meanwhile, fox plays in waiting rooms all over the country. I would love to know what deal they make with the streaming services. Fox probably pays them.
Ninga
(8,620 posts)Ohioboy
(3,479 posts)If you want MSNBC and others you pay extra.
samsingh
(17,900 posts)republican and maga ones are.
we have a huge disadvantage.
usonian
(14,100 posts)I posted this earlier.
But changed it recently.
DaBronx
(484 posts)Full stop right there on the truth train.
DownriverDem
(6,663 posts)TV, talk radio, local news stations (some areas) & podcasts. They get their message out 24/7. Rich liberals need to step up. We had some balance when Air America was on the radio. There is no balance.
Ndp5
(82 posts)Look, Im sorry, but the reason the NYT and other publications are behind a paywall is because they cant support a serious news gathering operation on ad revenue alone.
And the reason online advertising is so out of whack is Google, which through anticompetitive practices sucked up $237.9 BILLION in online ad revenue in 2023. Together with Meta and Amazon, it accounts for the majority of online ad revenue in America.
The reason those right wing outlets can operate on the cheap is because they mostly spout bullshit and react to real news generated by newspapers.
You could see this problem coming a mile away. I remember talking about it with fellow door-knockers on the first Obama campaign, who agreed it was sorta troubling that news outlets were starting to disappear or slash staff, but said they hadnt given the issue much thought. And these were thoughtful people.
Fast-forward nearly 20 years and theres been no public pressure on Congress to follow other countries lead in reining in Big Tech to help truthful news organizations.
Upset about the state of our news ecosystem? Write your Congressperson or Senator and ask them what theyve done to support the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act. Or stop supporting Google, which a judge recently found has been lowering the quality of its products because it can. But dont complain about news orgs putting up paywalls to survive. No shit, propaganda and bullshit are cheap.
Yavin4
(36,488 posts)And still make a profit. They can just run ads before and during each story like YouTube and Spotify do with their content. Advertisers would pay dearly to put ads in front of their readers.
Paywalls are a cop out.
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)So YouTube/Spotify etc. can get by with the amount of ad revenue they generate. The newspapers absolutely CANNOT, because they have to spend a lot more money on content. In addition, now advertisers do not need to pay the premium to place ads in the online NYTimes, etc. they can target that same audience on YouTube (as per my techie husband who spent a good part of his early life career developing the field of online advertising).
Yavin4
(36,488 posts)And somehow that's free.
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)Yavin4
(36,488 posts)I'm saying offer it without the paywall but with ads like Spotify does with Rogan.
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)would probably be end up as three or more ads per ads per article. And how many people would stop reading the article, complain about it, and use archive.ph to finish the article if they really cared to? With Spotify or YouTube, if you want the content, you really have to pay or put up with ads theres usually not a real free option like archive.ph.
Ad revenue alone is simply not enough to pay for a news organization. When my grandfather was the business manager of a newspaper, ads could cut it because the only alternatives for advertisers were radio and later the beginnings of tv. Now advertisers get the same audience or better by supporting content that much cheaper or even free to produce.
TV news generally doesnt do that they have other revenue streams or owners with deep pockets. As a recent example, MSNBC is been spun off with other low-earning properties the owners arent happy with their ad revenue.
PBS/NPR get some government funding, but the great majority of their funding comes from supporter donations and grants from foundations. I think that might be a viable alternative, but wed need to get Congress to pay something, and then wed need some foundations to donate. And wed still need a lot of people to make donations.
Ndp5
(82 posts)Contrast the quality of sites running on ad revenue alone to those that also rely on paywalls and subscription revenue. I am familiar with how both types of news operation work and there just is no comparison in terms of quality.
The fact is, print advertising was lucrative. Online advertising for news publications is cheap, cheap, cheap.
If you dont like it, again, look to Google, which has a monopoly in search advertising. The judge in the trial underway now may also confirm that they have a monopoly in ad tech, the plumbing of the online ad world, and have been illegally manipulating how ad rates are set for everyone online.
Read the behind-the-scenes account from content creators trying to engage with Google that someone else posted in this thread. Google is a bad-faith actor that has shafted us all to make a buck. Or three hundred billion of them, to be more precise.
Yavin4
(36,488 posts)Murdoch's NY Post doesn't have a firewall.
Ndp5
(82 posts)Murdochs NY Post breaks very little news on its own and mostly traffics in aggregation and clickbait. Theres no real substance there.
That said, it is (or was) a free country. If you dont want to pay for news, dont. Your taxes support NPR, so until Trump and his cronies go after that, you can get their news without a paywall. But there is no way for newspapers of the caliber of the NYT to drop their paywalls without drastically cutting back their newsgathering operations.
Personally, I will continue to support a handful of newspapers. Not as many as Id like to read, but until better group subscription options evolve, its the best I can do.
The vast majority of local news reporters are hardworking true believers who could make more money in PR but choose to stick it out trying to inform their communities. They dont deserve the abuse thats slung their way because people confuse them with rich pundits in Washington. I am happy to contribute modest amounts as long as I can.
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)This economic problem of quality news production where the really good stuff only gets more expensive because technology cant make it more efficient is called Baumols cost disease. Its the same reason your local symphony orchestra, if you still have one, is reliant on philanthropy, corporate sponsorships, or hiking ticket prices for an inevitably more elite audience whose own wealth has been increasing from productivity increases in other parts of the economy. For journalists, when your job is to bring the facts to the biggest audience possible when were already trying to climb out of a hole of historically serving affluent/whiter audiences this dynamic is toxic. Baumols cost disease also the same principle why shifting newsrooms to be nonprofit rather than for-profit is not going to fix the underlying economic issues making quality journalism harder to fund.
From https://mattdpearce.substack.com/p/journalisms-fight-for-survival-in
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)The work of obtaining facts has a major economic disadvantage against the production of bullshit, and its only getting worse. Im a pro-labor person, so I often think about the problems of our journalism through a lens of how we do our work, why its done, and whos paying for it. After many years of watching my fellow journalists suffer at legacy newspapers, digital startups, big commercial newsrooms, small nonprofit outlets and public media all alike, heres what I learned the hard way: Americas marketplace of ideas has a competition problem. The biggest story about media and the internet is that new technology AI, social media, smartphones, etc. keeps driving down the cost of producing bullshit while the cost of obtaining quality information only goes up. Its getting more and more expensive to produce the good stuff, and the good stuff has to compete against more and more trash once its out on the market.
https://mattdpearce.substack.com/p/journalisms-fight-for-survival-in
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)jfz9580m
(15,523 posts)FWIW
https://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/tech/google-creators-event.html
Google invited some of the most vocal independent site owners whove been shadowbanned by their brutal updates of the last two years, and 20 of them came to pay their respects. We had no idea what the purpose of our visit was going in, but we knew by the time we left.
Google has never done anything like it before. After this account, they likely never will again.
Danny Sullivan hosted the event. He may be the most knowledgeable and helpful person still left at Google, though he has no real power to effect change.
The day before, he led the group on a tour of Googles biggest office during the busiest part of weekday work hours and seemed slightly embarrassed that at no point during the tour was anyone there. The building was empty, a shell designed as a hub of activity, drained of people willing to engage in being active.
The idea that this might be a funeral, was put forward as a half-joke by one of the shadowbanned attendees during our first Q&A session, in which we asked questions and got no answers. Her funeral joke should have been funny. Only the Googlers laughed.
Most of these site owners seemed certain the funeral they were attending, was their own.
Google Sucks Us Dry And Throws Away The Husk
We spent the morning politely answering questions from Google, questions designed to help Google improve its search engine, questions that in no way benefited any of the shadowbanned attendees. After, we were given a chance (we thought) to get something useful out of the trip. We split into small breakout groups divided up by category.
We few Entertainment site owners rearranged ourselves into a corner semi-circle, and sat drinking mint lemon water from cups made of recycled Kale. We were joined by four Googlers, who began pumping us for information.
During this small group discussion, I and others tried to get our Googlers to address the biggest problem facing our industry: Google giving big brands special treatment. Each time a site owner brought up the topic, we were quickly steered in another direction.
Undeterred, we then asked the only question that mattered: Why has Google shadowbanned our sites? Googles Chief Search Scientist answered this question using a strategy based around gaslighting and said they hadnt. Google doesnt ever derank an entire site, only individual pages, he said. There is no site-wide classifier. He insisted it is only done at the page level.
Many of the shadowbanned site owners attempted to politely push back and point out that the reason all 20 of us were there was specifically because our entire site was deranked from Google in a single night.
He continued insisting this didnt happen and then looked confused that anyone would disagree with him.
When asked what was wrong with our sites, as if we were jilted lovers in an abusive relationship being kicked to the curb, one Googler actually said its not you its me.
Finally, someone bluntly asked, since nothing is wrong with our sites, how do we recover?
Googles elderly Chief Search Scientist answered, without an ounce of pity or concern, that there would be updates but he didnt know when theyd happen or what theyd do. Further questions on the subject were met with indifference as if he didnt understand why we cared.
Hed gotten the information he wanted. The conference was over. I dont think he even said thanks.
Instead, Googles wise wizard of search science wrapped things up with a self-congratulatory speech about what a great job we were doing at helping Google deliver better search results to his users.
Search results without any of us in them.
It was then I realized this wasnt our funeral, it was Googles.
Montauk6
(8,707 posts)I notice this because I don't log into YT when I'm posting to the Music Appreciation (for fear that my links while logged in won't be accessible to someone without an account): it's like I get welcomed by a lot of right-wing suggestions off the bat.
Conservatives understand that deploying their improperganda is a major investment, one that may not even be profitable on the balance sheet but worth every dime to destroy as many brain cells as possible.
If only we had overzealous billionaires willing to part with that kind of cash to disseminate THE TRUTH. (And, sorry/not sorry, THE TRUTH has a notoriously liberal bias)
Ndp5
(82 posts)Haha, that last line is from Colberts WHCA speech, no? Now I know some of you are going to say, I did look that up, and thats not true. Thats because you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut.
ItsjustMe
(11,730 posts)It all came from liberal media.
Trump, Trump, Trump, 24 hours a day. They gave Trump unlimited facetime.
Montauk6
(8,707 posts)Hotler
(12,255 posts)When the words get hard they give up.
SunSeeker
(53,810 posts)The Wandering Harper
(695 posts)and I've been stuck for hours wondering what to go with for a username
LauraInLA
(1,309 posts)The Wandering Harper
(695 posts)it could I suppose, but it's been a couple years since I was actually a wandering harper
RainCaster
(11,578 posts)Their view of us is one we must look at and take to heart. I pay for subscriptions to several, but most I do not. I read about events that we never hear about in our press. I see a selection of news stories that shows a very different world view. And then there are the editorials- it can be educating to read these viewpoints.
lees1975
(6,017 posts)They aren't necessarily the most truthful.
Josiesdad
(50 posts)Actually, our constitution anticipated a need for the people to be able to communicate with each other in a free and low friction format. To this end, our founders created a federally protected postal system.
If the second amendment can be construed so that it recognizes assault weapons which are beyond the wildest imagination of our founders, why can't the concept of the federally protected postal system be expanded to cover internet communications? Mail fraud has been proven to be a pretty good deterrent against people lying to you to make a gain.