Yesterday I wrote that the job of a reporter is to generate revenue and that is what drives editors:
That’s the dirty little secret. It’s not reporters who decide what it newsworthy, it’s not anchors or pundits on CNN or CBS that decide what is newsworthy, it’s not never newspaper editors that decide what is newsworthy, it’s the general public that decides that a piece of news or information is interesting enough that it’s worth paying for with their time and their money or both.
It is the editor and/or producers job to sport such stories as they are developing and/or to recognize such stories brought to them by their reporters or freelancers and arrange coverage in on their platform either print, video or web and if said story generates the eyeballs that produce the revenues that pays the bills to stick with it or if it doesn’t to drop or ignore it.
Now the problem with that statement is this: If it is correct then why does the media lean so far left in print, television and online when it provides them with only a fraction of the possible eyeballs and revenue desired?
Well the answer is this, since the goal is revenue it doesn’t matter where that revenue comes from.
Now one can make $100,000 profit by making a 10c a copy of a million people a month but if you have someone or a group someones willing to give you that $100,000 a month you don’t have to cater to what is newsworthy, you just have cater to what that someone or group of someones want to pay for. Tina Brown made an entire career on doing this
As Stacy McCain once put it:
Whatever else you might say about Tina Brown, she’s undeniably brilliant at convincing investors to lose money on her projects.
Of course once they stop then suddenly you find your magazine or newspaper is worth less than a big mac and needs a Jeff Bezos who has more money than he knows what to do with to keep financing stories that he wants to advance rather than what actually interests the public.
And of course once you have people with big pockets deciding what’s fit to print, or to have online, then they can also decide what isn’t fit to print or have online and it doesn’t matter if the money is coming from George Soros
Media Matters gave Google “the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake new sites” so they could be banned from Google’s advertising network.
The Gateway Pundit pointed out that in 2016, Google carried out that plan on the Gateway Pundit blog and other conservative sites, including Breitbart, the Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse.
Facebook, meanwhile has changed its newsfeed algorithm, ostensibly to combat “fake news,” causing a precipitous decline in traffic for many conservative sites.
Read the whole thing. What has happened is that the Soros-funded groups have exploited their access to social-media companies — most of which are based near San Francisco, and staffed with graduates of liberal “elite” universities — to impose a definition of “fake news” that applies only to conservative sites. If Media Matters is in charge of deciding who the purveyors of “propaganda” are, you can be sure that no liberal publications will make the list of banned sources.
Or Red China
“Apple Inc. pulled illegal apps from its App Store in China after coming under fire from state media for not doing enough to filter out banned material,” Yoko Kubota reports for The Wall Street Journal. “‘Gambling apps are illegal and not allowed on the App Store in China,’ Apple said in a statement Monday. ‘We have already removed many apps and developers for trying to distribute illegal gambling apps on our App Store, and we are vigilant in our efforts to find these and stop them from being on the App Store.’”
“The removals were reported earlier by Chinese state broadcaster CCTV on Sunday, which said 25,000 apps were pulled,” Kubota reports. “Apple didn’t confirm that number. It offers more than 1.8 million apps in China, according to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. Removing 25,000 apps would amount to about 1.4% of that total.”
it’s all about the revenue and where it come from. If the source of the revenue is the public than the media and the net will decide that what the public wants is “newsworthy” or worthy of publication. If the source of the revenue is a political party, or a government or a George Soros is it they and not you who will decide what news is fit to print.
Well at least you’ve got guys like me.
I’m not a blond bombshell like Tina Brown (once) was nor do I have a George Soros sending me checks and as I’m not likely to be suddenly changing sides in the political wars it’s unlikely that any folks like them will suddenly be showering me with cash or attention.
My pay for this comes from the voluntary contributions of readers. If you think this work is worth your while and wish to support it and my writers please subscribe to the site below.
Or buying my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer
Either way it’s most appreciated.