How the Internet Is Breaking Journalism

[@askleonotenboom]

✅ Watch next ▶ Stop Spreading Manure ▶ kzbin.info/www/bejne/bKDGcnRupt93esk

[@mrkgrmn3]

I've reached a point where any video on KZbin using the word "shocking" or "bombshell" is an instant non-click. Luckily I've reached an age where most "celebrity" news references people I've never heard of and couldn't care less about.

[@darrennew8211]

Back when people were first trying to figure out how to filter spam, they discovered the absolute best way to distinguish spam mail from non-spam mail was whether any text was bright red.

[@SueFerreira75]

Add “terrifying” and “this changes the world” as added words for non-click.

[@iceManSwag]

​@@SueFerreira75when I read such headlines I also don't click by reading I feel 🤮🤢

[@MihaiKrieger]

I reached the other end of the spectrum. I've cancelled all my social media accounts except KZbin, and I don't believe anything, even if it's possible that it might be true.

[@iceManSwag]

KZbin is slowed down in my Mother Land! I'm tech savy 😉

[@old-moose]

I taught history for over 40 years. That whole time I had to warn me students not to trust something just because it was in print. In a 1974 paper in my master's program, I discussed the dangers that computers might present. It sucks to be right. Things don't change, they only get easier.

[@Headkase3D]

I used to work for a local newspaper as a page layout subeditor, prior to it closing up a few years back. From my personal experience, newspapers and print media are iffy at best when it comes to presenting reliable information. Journalists are often clueless about the stories they are covering, often not knowing enough basic facts to even ask the questions needed to get at the full truth. Press-releases sent to the newspaper were often simply re-worded and published without proper fact-checking, either through laziness or cutting corners to meet print deadlines. Paid-for advertising was often presented as actual news articles without informing the reader it was advertorial material. News which would cast unfavorable light on prominent advertisers was often "conveniently" not reported on. Mistakes in reporting were often not corrected in later editions, in the hope the reading public wouldn't notice. Saving face was more important than reporting the actual facts. The lazy slop from journalists which I had to clean-up for basic grammar and spelling before I could even start laying out pages constantly blew my mind, especially given it had already been looked over by the chief editor before it reached my desk. I often had to fix basic factual errors myself because journalists couldn't even get street names correct etc, so it's anyone's guess what else they were getting wrong. Traditional media has nothing to be especially proud of when it comes to reporting the facts. The internet garbage news just makes them look better in comparison.

[@LarkOfTheWoods]

Thanks, Leo! This is the kind of commentary we used to the get from the major news networks when I was a kid. Now all we get from them is hype and tripe, and scam ads at the bottom the pages of their websites.

[@sunshine3914]

I was a news junkie beginning at the age of 11 (thankfully we never had cable). Then in the early 90s, when I was 33, it all began to become total speculation. About three weeks into the death of Princess Diana (1997), I quit watching cold turkey. As of 16 years ago, I haven’t owned a tv. I miss it like gout & arthritis.

[@gkhan8765]

What the internet has showed us is that we’ve always been lied to. The internet has actually liberated journalism from the gate keepers.

[@boblangill6209]

That's lazy, sloppy thinking that allows you to believe what you want to believe and feel like you're the one who's being objective.

[@MaynardFreek]

@@boblangill6209 just the opposite

[@harveybc]

@@MaynardFreek Yep. Mainstream and our government would never lie to us. We entered Vietnam because we were attacked in the gulf of Tonkin. There were weapons of mass destruction. And it was safe and effective. RIGHT? (These are just a few of the things we were told that had been documented as being false.)

[@waynea4651]

Absolutely correct.

[@Digital.Photography]

The 2020 movie, The Social Dilemma explained all of this in detail. Most people didn’t believe it. It took a few years for some people to realize how true it is and it’ll take another 10 years for the sheep to see the truth. Thanks Leo

[@miked8121]

A decade ago, I couldn't stop laughing when I heard that a large number of Americans got their news from Face Book. I got a lot of thumbs down.

[@darrennew8211]

It's not the internet breaking journalism. It's click-to-pay advertising. It used to be something like New York Times would publish papers based on subscribers, advertisers would advertise based on subscribers, and you'd lose subscribers if the paper didn't provide reliable value. NYT had some kinds of customers, WSJ had a different kind, WWN had yet another kind. And that worked. Then we got the ability to measure how many ads were seen, and the ability to not pay advertisers if viewers don't look at that specific ad. So there's click bait, there's people stealing content and putting it on their own site, and etc.

[@ronharbin6678]

Some very good thoughts. I admit I'm guilty of clicking on "click bait". I need to do better or it's all I'll be presented with. Thanks!

[@karenm2669]

Every person who ever canceled their subscription to a news outlet, whether print or digital, in a huff over an opinion column, a headline, or a whatever else, has directly contributed to the problem they now complain about. They could have written to the editor like in the old days, they could have left a comment, but no, they chose to make news outlets more heavily dependent on advertisers’ dollars to pay reporters than they had ever been. It’s the most short-sighted, bass-ackward form of protest there has ever been.

[@Milesco]

Nah, any media company with access to advertising revenue is going to be motivated to maximize that revenue as much as it can. They're going to do that anyway, regardless of how many paying subscribers they have.

[@johnhpalmer6098]

Not only that, but it's passive aggressive. It's become down to "not wanting to hurt people's feelings, so why not just dance around the bush? As a nuerodivergent person, I let it be known more directly, but with some form of tact (had to learn that as an adolescent). Don't believe in conspiracy theories, being all bleeding heart, passive aggressive etc. Just be honest and let it be known more directly is all. If more neurotypical folks did that, things would not be so bad as they are currently.

[@jstasiak2262]

You are wrong. When the New York Times went off the rails ~2015, i wrote numerous “letters to the editor,” many of which were published-until they weren’t. When Trump became president in 2017, the Times became an echo chamber for the neo-liberal agenda and stopped publishing my letters. The same thing happened with the Wall Street Journal and The Economist. The overt and unabashed liberal bias was just plain ridiculous. I no longer subscribe to any of those newspapers and refuse to economically support them.

[@D.von.N]

Where I come from, ads financed media came before a subscription was a thing. They were more colourful, models reading the news, content was more about entertainment than education... and they filled a vacuum the traditional media couldn't. Like if you got a cake after you spent all your life on a bread and butter. It's a business.

[@LarcR]

If I discover a news bit that doesn't deliver on what it promises or that I know to be incorrect, I indicate that if there is a way such as giving a dislike or replying. More than 2 or 3 times, the site goes off my list permanently.

[@harveybc]

There is a lot of truth in what you say. Problem with just going with mainstream corporate reporting is they also jump in with the stories before what actually happened is really known and the fact that they all tend to use the same phrases and terms shows they are just regurgitating what they are fed. How many of their stories have changed drastically? And they rarely do actual investigation any longer. Instead they just read what they are given. Like you said, it all comes down to think about what you hear. Whether it comes just from the internet or the TV you have to ask yourself, does it make sense? There are sources that seem to almost always be accurate, others almost always false. For example, the TV media reports that Russia blew up the pipeline, then changed it a couple of times to some Ukrainian divers did it. (Neither makes much sense.) Or do I believe what Seymore Hurst reported, heard on the internet, which makes complete sense. He has won awards for his investigative journalism.

[@rjapcok]

To a degree, the TV news is much the same. TV news shows whatever they can to get our eyeballs on the screen. This is why you see a lot of house fires, car wrecks, etc. If they can throw in a 9-1-1 call with a lot of hysterical screaming, so much the better! When they do have a story to report, it usually lacks substance. With the TV, eyeballs on the screen translate to ratings which translates to advertising dollars. The internet is no different, it just achieves the objective (ad revenue) in a little different way.

[@FloatingLizard]

Stay with independent news sources 🎉

[@1verstapp]

some of us don't like sensational headlines, but we're a minority.

[@joannet8373]

Thank you for your video today!

[@2009raindrop]

And this is why the Washington Post is switching to "storytelling". . .

[@waynea4651]

Ever since Bezos bought it, the WP has become little more than a leftist screed.

[@kingech_B15]

There never has been real news.

[@glasslinger]

Newsmax and Sky News in Australia. I myself will stick with cat videos.

[@nelsonv741]

Very well said Sir! I have seen and enjoyed many of your videos so I just subscribed! Thanks!

[@liowyew]

I’m committed to breaking the habit of sharing information, whether it’s true or false, but I find it challenging at times.nnot.

[@MonteVanNortwick]

We need more perfect people who research everything!

[@margienobbman]

I have a few sites that I have found to be trustworthy over time and check them against each other to determine what is true. I will admit to clicking on sensational headlines of other sites from time to time but as soon as I find out the video has nothing to do with the headline or contain lies and false information I tell you tube to never show me videos from this site again. Mostly you just have to learn to read between the lines of the headlines.

[@sunshine3914]

You can do that without clicking on the video.

[@Lili-xq9sn]

A good political news source on KZbin is Brian Tyler Cohen (BTC)

[@vadec5909]

Great video! Thanks

[@D.von.N]

I have become allergic to clickbaits. I tend to hide thumbnails with excessive facial expressions by AI, blocked many channels titling their videos with a word 'collapse' regarding politics or economics... China has been collapsing for three years now. Just noe IMF finally starts a more realistc rhetoric in that regard. Only some styles of AI music are allowed in my feed, as a work background. Exaggerations trigger me. Off they go! I want a boring factual content, ads free. Sometimes a few sips of clear water is the best flavour.

[@fredflintstone1485]

Sadly, it will never go back to truth . Not while there is the reward for absolute trash headlines. You are a breath of fresh air after wading through all the crap on the net. Please stay who you are.

[@SmartAndTidy]

You're telling me that the mainstream media tell the truth? Sorry, mate. No way.

[@JamesBondDZero7Mi6]

“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” Gautam Buddha Quote. Do your own research and find the real truth via data, etc.

[@soundNTechdude2022]

Yes, indeed!!

[@iceManSwag]

I've seen a video on KZbin how to fix a multi language problem on Windows by replacing Fonts in the system.... While I know how to change the setting in Windows to fix this. The video had about 100000 views & people where thanking for tempering with the system files... Unfortunately a lot of videos about tech are wrong or misleading like guides to optimize that actually ruin your performance or security. I remember my friend in 2013 "I dont use Antivirus" I was like you are crazy. In about 1-2 years I get a call from him how his PC was encrypted with a ransomware that you had to pay Crypto currency to unlock. Sometimes theese Crypto accounts get blocked so even if you are willing to pay but you can't! So never roam Internet without securing your PC & this is also not 100% safe. Anything that has any sort of connection is at risk modem, WiFi, LAN, Bluetooth you name it.

[@0x8badbeef]

In the context of KZbin if I don't know the channel I click on the channel name and read the titles in their video tab to get an insight as to their bias. Then I click on oldest to see how long they've been doing this and read the titles again to see if they have always been this way.

[@johnhpalmer6098]

That's a good way to go when it comes to YT. I watch it all the time, but am very selective about what I watch. If you go just by the posts on Trump (for or against) is a good example. I scroll through the recommendations by YT, and read the title of the recommended video, right now, a lot of push back (or seems anyway) against Trump but meanwhile, no one is putting him in jail and letting the whole thing with him being president commence, so I DO hope the videos that proclaim pushback that could stop Trump materialize, but then again, posts that show they possibly are for him, I just move on past. It now takes being a critical thinker, sadly, it's becoming not a thing for many folks. I'm old enough to have learned how to be critically thinking and not take stuff at face value. Also, I think being neurodivergent helps.

[@0x8badbeef]

@@johnhpalmer6098 I'm just pointing out it helps to know something about the author before digesting it, or not.

[@jackfrank303]

Reuters and Associated Press have free news websites.

[@cjc363636]

Those and BBC World Service are my choices. Problem they likely face is the dry nature of their content doesn't attract the click-bait eyeballs.

[@waynea4651]

Both of which are completely unreliable. And that also includes the leftist BBC. No thank you.

[@BenEngel1961]

I can’t help thinking about a certain individual who got inaugurated today 🤭🫣 Good luck to all of you in the US and the rest of the world 🤗

[@NoEgg4u]

Thanks. But our success will not involve luck.