← Back to context

Comment by coredog64

2 days ago

Have you ever listened to NPR and not been subject to Gell-Mann amnesia?

And, yet, that reporting is better than what 99% of the public have in their brains on a subject.

Want an interesting discussion? Talk about "AI" to your non-technical family members. You'll take the NPR Gell-Mann effect any day over what they've gotten from other sources.

> Have you ever listened to NPR and not been subject to Gell-Mann amnesia?

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Personally, I support public funding of journalism, but there needs to be a lot more of it. Enough to support competing outlets in most markets.

  • Isn't the whole idea of freedom of the press to act as a check to governmental power? With state-run media you tend to get lots of propaganda and little actual news.

    Personally, I support a ban on public (taxpayer) funding of journalism. Keep it independent.

    • > With state-run media you tend to get lots of propaganda and little actual news

      I think the BBC are a good counter to that argument. No, they’re not flawless but over the decades they’ve delivered plenty of journalism that’s held government to account.

      4 replies →

    • Just government power? Corporate media is no less afflicted by this problem. Small-time journalism is just as capable of being tendentious. Advertising also shapes coverage, as subscriptions and reader purchases never cover operating expenses.

      In any case, this is not a problem to be solved. I do think the media should stop concealing or misrepresenting their political leanings. They will always be there. Everyone has a POV. You might as well openly advertise what that POV is. Then it is up to readers and viewers to draw from multiple POVs (which they might not do, but that's just life).

    • This position is suitable, for the 1990s. Even then, the BBC showed that public journalism != propaganda.

      In fact, the evidence is that if you build institutions, you can actually have very effective public options.

      However, in the current era, news is simply being outcompeted for revenue. Even the NYT is dependent on games for relevance.

      And the attack vectors to mould and muzzle public understanding have changed. Instead of a steady drip of controlled information, it is private production of overwhelming amounts of content.

      Most good people are fighting yesterdays war, with yesterdays weapons, tactics and ideas when it comes to speech.

      1 reply →