The fact that you wrote this piece on the same day that Popular Information published this piece on a Republican dark money group creating literal fake news sites to prop up right wing candidates (https://popular.info/p/senate-republicans-launch-network) is perfect
Hell yes and amen, amen, amen. Just plugging here (also because this is my job now) that many state legislatures have started debating and enacting policies to direct more public support to local journalism jobs in particular, in First Amendment-friendly ways that are shielded from editorial meddling. Many of these governments already provide substantial incentives for film/TV production in their states, out of an understanding that if they don’t do it, quality media production won’t happen locally. And quality journalism is pretty cheap to fund. SAG-AFTRA and The NewsGuild have been important supporters of a bill I’m working on right now in California, AB 2222, that makes it cheaper to hire and employ local journalists at all kinds of outlets. https://www.rebuildlocalnews.org/
It's annoying, sure, but it's also unsustainable when in this economy money is only flowing to the people who have no use for the news the rest of us consume. I happily subscribe here and at Defector, but to how many more sites can I subscribe before it starts taking a considerable chunk out of my monthly pay? I'd love to see some consolidation in the independent news space (like, say, The 51st and Hellgate NYC and whatever the equivalent is in Philadelphia and Boston) but then you get the same problems of scale and audience. It sucks!
I don’t have a problem with ads; I have, as my wife notes, a visual delete button, along with an audio one. If writers had some way of filtering the ad stream to block the mendacious corporate stuff (fossil fuels, pharmaceuticals, etc) they loathe, then that might be a more palatable option.
As to the multiple paid subscription dilemma, I think it would be great to have an a la carte option for substack and other platforms, wherein one could pay a flat/monthly fee for say, ten subscriptions, that one could renew/alter on an annual basis. The individual writer income stream would be slightly less than the current model, but it might provide more revenue and expand the subscription base over time.
Is the public demanding journalism? Approval rates of the brand of "journalism" are on par with approval rates for AI -- just about 1/4 of people value the term. Journalists insist that they are valued, but there aren't results to match up. (Compare that graph from Bloomberg with the number of new jobs in tech that allow for innovation and creativity in a way that the draconian rules of journalism do not.)
I'm in favor of all the things you're in favor of -- an informed populace, and journalism in general -- and I genuinely think there's a solution in what public media has accomplished in the past two years. The StarTribune, one of the last companies standing in independent news, is going nonprofit because of its independent, civically engaged audience. NPR is killing it despite the loss of federal funding.
Journalists also need to get over their AI and tech aversion. It's here. It's been in development for decades, and it's not going away. AI is like insurance: the necessary evil layer through which all business will interact. Audiences are using AI to find news, and they will continue to do so. You can hate the audience for liking AI, although that's a rather juvenile position.
AI shouldn't be used for writing prose, but it should be used for writing code and understanding how people interact with digital products. It should be used for building new businesses that can support not only journalists but other creative workers. Lean into the tools (and fundraising) available build new digital products and models -- specifically new monetization and ad systems -- instead of insisting loudly, and to increasingly deaf ears, that the craft of journalism is needed. We need more creative, business-minded journalists building better digital products to house the journalism and civic engagement, so we're not stuck with media scions who are just as bad as tech CEOs.
Maybe rethinking unionization at state or local levels instead of federal? Federal laws to protect unionization are soooo difficult to pass. Start at the local or state level and move up?
The fact that you wrote this piece on the same day that Popular Information published this piece on a Republican dark money group creating literal fake news sites to prop up right wing candidates (https://popular.info/p/senate-republicans-launch-network) is perfect
Hell yes and amen, amen, amen. Just plugging here (also because this is my job now) that many state legislatures have started debating and enacting policies to direct more public support to local journalism jobs in particular, in First Amendment-friendly ways that are shielded from editorial meddling. Many of these governments already provide substantial incentives for film/TV production in their states, out of an understanding that if they don’t do it, quality media production won’t happen locally. And quality journalism is pretty cheap to fund. SAG-AFTRA and The NewsGuild have been important supporters of a bill I’m working on right now in California, AB 2222, that makes it cheaper to hire and employ local journalists at all kinds of outlets. https://www.rebuildlocalnews.org/
This is the way.
𝘈𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳-𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨.
It's annoying, sure, but it's also unsustainable when in this economy money is only flowing to the people who have no use for the news the rest of us consume. I happily subscribe here and at Defector, but to how many more sites can I subscribe before it starts taking a considerable chunk out of my monthly pay? I'd love to see some consolidation in the independent news space (like, say, The 51st and Hellgate NYC and whatever the equivalent is in Philadelphia and Boston) but then you get the same problems of scale and audience. It sucks!
We rightly speak of food deserts but we should speak about the news deserts across the country. This feels like a step in the right direction: https://www.editorandpublisher.com/stories/knight-foundation-invests-5-million-to-launch-local-newsrooms,262700
I don’t have a problem with ads; I have, as my wife notes, a visual delete button, along with an audio one. If writers had some way of filtering the ad stream to block the mendacious corporate stuff (fossil fuels, pharmaceuticals, etc) they loathe, then that might be a more palatable option.
As to the multiple paid subscription dilemma, I think it would be great to have an a la carte option for substack and other platforms, wherein one could pay a flat/monthly fee for say, ten subscriptions, that one could renew/alter on an annual basis. The individual writer income stream would be slightly less than the current model, but it might provide more revenue and expand the subscription base over time.
Is the public demanding journalism? Approval rates of the brand of "journalism" are on par with approval rates for AI -- just about 1/4 of people value the term. Journalists insist that they are valued, but there aren't results to match up. (Compare that graph from Bloomberg with the number of new jobs in tech that allow for innovation and creativity in a way that the draconian rules of journalism do not.)
I'm in favor of all the things you're in favor of -- an informed populace, and journalism in general -- and I genuinely think there's a solution in what public media has accomplished in the past two years. The StarTribune, one of the last companies standing in independent news, is going nonprofit because of its independent, civically engaged audience. NPR is killing it despite the loss of federal funding.
Journalists also need to get over their AI and tech aversion. It's here. It's been in development for decades, and it's not going away. AI is like insurance: the necessary evil layer through which all business will interact. Audiences are using AI to find news, and they will continue to do so. You can hate the audience for liking AI, although that's a rather juvenile position.
AI shouldn't be used for writing prose, but it should be used for writing code and understanding how people interact with digital products. It should be used for building new businesses that can support not only journalists but other creative workers. Lean into the tools (and fundraising) available build new digital products and models -- specifically new monetization and ad systems -- instead of insisting loudly, and to increasingly deaf ears, that the craft of journalism is needed. We need more creative, business-minded journalists building better digital products to house the journalism and civic engagement, so we're not stuck with media scions who are just as bad as tech CEOs.
Maybe rethinking unionization at state or local levels instead of federal? Federal laws to protect unionization are soooo difficult to pass. Start at the local or state level and move up?