Better off or not?

[DWSmith 0]

Michael said:

The question I have “do you think it is better to have a limited amount of resources for information or an unlimited amount of resources?

I guess a different way to ask ”do you find it more or less, better or worse, satisfying or irritating to have this information at your fingertips?”

 

My $.02 worth:

Newspaper, radio, magazine, TV, Worldwide Web, etc. are all in it for the money they make through advertising.  Sex sells.  Sensationalism sells. Controversy sells.  ...  Also, all of these seem to have their own agenda these days.  Even mainstream TV news regularly twists stories to create controversy and increase viewership.  (Have you heard of Surveillance Capitalism?)

I don't think having immediate access to information is a problem.  Discerning what is true is the problem.

You used to be able to count on certain news sources for at least attempting honest reporting.  Many good newspapers and magazines have died over the years.

Personally, I get my news from several Youtube official mainstream news channels then compare what I hear and attempt to filter out the chaff.  I also listen to National Public Radio for in depth stories even though they are not perfect either.  I do occasionally watch BBC World News to mix in what they're saying.

So I think it's better to have a limited amount of truthful information and a very limited amount of the nonsense but those days are long gone!

Truthful news today is definitely more of a challenge than it used to be but it's possible to find.  The TRUTH is out there but where???

[Bryon Anderson 0]

On 10/28/2023 at 10:09 AM, Ephemerella said:

Now here I sound like an old curmudgeon. This is a real deterioration of news media. I note this is independent of the political leanings of the various news outlets. My father spent his career in the news media business and to him it was important that the reporters and editors were able to substantiate the facts as published, both as a business strategy (keeps away expensive litigation) and as a way to maintain the reputation and integrity of their news outlet.  I'm guessing today's news media is more concerned with short term profitability than long term reputation and survival of the business. 

As a consequence, while there is more information available, it is less reliable. Also, since it may be difficult to trace the source of the published information, one cannot easily discern whether any report is from independent sources or independently collected information, or is re-publication of someone else's erroneous report.

Not sure what the solution is here, other than to not believe everything published until there are sufficient number of independent sources stating the same information.  That, and, of course, not buying products advertised on outlets with unreliable reporting. 

 

Well said Ephemerella; I couldn't agree more. The combination of media outlets prioritizing profit over journalistic integrity, and consumers who seem to prioritize the degree to which information syncs with their own personal beliefs over its objectivity and truthfulness has been a recipe for disaster. It's been simmering in the pot for years, and now I fear it has finally boiled over.