← Back to context

Comment by FerretFred

4 years ago

It's the same in the UK, by and large. We have a small group of <strikeout>advertisement sellers</strikeout> news media companies that absorb local papers and churn out overly-similar content with different newspaper names on the front page. The online versions of these are sooooo bad - practically no actual written content with any depth, interspersed with video "articles" which incorporate more ads. Then try and find the actual news in among the clickbait links. Want better access? "Simply register and answer some suspiciously personal questions"...

I tried to do some research recently: could I consult their archives? "Nothing older than a couple of years", so no. Photographers? "If you have photos or videos please upload them to us". Timely coverage of local issues? "You won't believe what British Seniors aged 55-plus are buying today!!"

As far as I'm concerned they can crash and burn, and maybe groups of like-minded citizens can resurrect real local newspapers, albeit online only.

>groups of like-minded citizens can resurrect real local newspapers

Social media is the killer, because in a perfect world it would serve precisely this purpose. But instead of replicating the means of production for each locality, you share one globally - which also helps concerned readers from different geographies pool their resources. A fine vision, and its true, but we see now how severe the downside is: the dissociation of reader from event is the wiggle room in which professional rhetoricians can form new and exciting memetic viruses. And virtually no-one has the psychic immune system to wade through it on a daily basis and not get infected with something. These viruses are designed to serve a narrow aim, and the side-effects are ignored, and this is what leads to the meltdown we have now.

Of course, a simple behavior change can help: pay attention to news in proportion to its physical proximity to you! The knee-jerk reaction to see a national or global trend when anything bad happens is bad for the soul. We should be open to seeing trends, of course, but only slightly. At least a little bit of stubborn resistance to inferring a trend from two anecdotes is good for the soul, I think.