The Washington Post planned to endorse Kamala Harris over Donald Trump before owner Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder, decided again it, the newspaper reported.
When Bozos bought it, this was the exact concern, because there is no ethical billionaire. I’m pretty sure he promised to not interfere with the reporting or content. Turned out to be another lying, selfish asshole with more money than he can ever spend… Who could have predicted that? (besides everyone)
When the billionaires who own the media and the highest level of government are in bed together so long as the government continues to tailor it’s policies to ensure that the wealthy stay wealthy, then the line is so blurred it might as well not exist.
Maybe non-profit would be best. Incentives to encourage good journalism, but not trying to raise the bottom line every year, chopping costs and spamming mass amounts of AI garbage because I’d bet 100 shitty articles is worth more than 1 good article for their bottom line.
Easy access links to the journalists other works, peer reviews from other non-profit and about me profiles can also help people discern bias.
I’m no expert though, so I’m sure someone has tried it and found making money is better for their paychecks
What if it already exists, but you, like many others, don’t read it and instead continue to passively consume the very media you’re complaining about? Making better journalism doesn’t mean multiple generations of people hooked on social-media-feed dopamine hits will read it.
I’m subbed to my local NPR’s daily top news stories. Highly recommend folks in the US look to see if their local station has a similar program or find the closest one.
Private ownership of a news outlet breaks every definition of “free” in “free press”.
A “free press” no longer exists.
Eh… no? Most free press is privately owned. Just not by billionaires who influence the content.
When Bozos bought it, this was the exact concern, because there is no ethical billionaire. I’m pretty sure he promised to not interfere with the reporting or content. Turned out to be another lying, selfish asshole with more money than he can ever spend… Who could have predicted that? (besides everyone)
So government owned news is better?
When the billionaires who own the media and the highest level of government are in bed together so long as the government continues to tailor it’s policies to ensure that the wealthy stay wealthy, then the line is so blurred it might as well not exist.
Maybe non-profit would be best. Incentives to encourage good journalism, but not trying to raise the bottom line every year, chopping costs and spamming mass amounts of AI garbage because I’d bet 100 shitty articles is worth more than 1 good article for their bottom line.
Easy access links to the journalists other works, peer reviews from other non-profit and about me profiles can also help people discern bias.
I’m no expert though, so I’m sure someone has tried it and found making money is better for their paychecks
What if it already exists, but you, like many others, don’t read it and instead continue to passively consume the very media you’re complaining about? Making better journalism doesn’t mean multiple generations of people hooked on social-media-feed dopamine hits will read it.
I’m subbed to my local NPR’s daily top news stories. Highly recommend folks in the US look to see if their local station has a similar program or find the closest one.
Free press is your uncle’s Facebook rants