The collapse of internet news

[egb_hibs]

Vice following other outlets down the Swanee. Looks like their future is clickbait.

Vice to shut down website and sack hundreds of staff as free news model collapses

Move will see the company switch to selling its content to established media brands

www.telegraph.co.uk

Vice Media to lay off hundreds of workers and stop publishing on its site

Memo sent by Bruce Dixon, the Vice Media chief, talks of transition to ‘studio model’ as employees term move ‘very upsetting’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Archie]

There's a problem with the online model that people don't want to pay for it. I subscibe to two newspapers and one freelance journalist. So I get access to proper journalism and no clickbait. Other sources like the BBC, CNN and Sky are underpinned by a news gathering operation, so they already have much of the content. But we can't have it both ways.

 

[Cavalier]

There's a problem with the online model that people don't want to pay for it. I subscibe to two newspapers and one freelance journalist. So I get access to proper journalism and no clickbait. Other sources like the BBC, CNN and Sky are underpinned by a news gathering operation, so they already have much of the content. But we can't have it both ways.

Out of interest which newspapers?

 

[Archie]

Out of interest which newspapers?

Guardian and New York Times.

 

[egb_hibs]

There's a problem with the online model that people don't want to pay for it. I subscibe to two newspapers and one freelance journalist. So I get access to proper journalism and no clickbait. Other sources like the BBC, CNN and Sky are underpinned by a news gathering operation, so they already have much of the content. But we can't have it both ways.

Yup. There is an argument that the free software movement gave rise to the expectation that stuff on the internet should be free. In turn this has compelled the approach where the user is the product and everything that comes from that, up to and including the social media driven polarisation of society. Along the way it’s destroyed music, journalism and so on, as viable careers.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[vasco de gama]

I'm guilty as charged with the expectation that with the internet everything became free. I complain that sites like the BBC became click bait stories about celebrities or stories linked to other BBC content rather than 'real news' but I'm reluctant to pay for the news. Mind you I was like that from a young age - I'd nick newspapers and magazines from John Menzies and I never had a tv license...

 

[egb_hibs]

I'm guilty as charged with the expectation that with the internet everything became free. I complain that sites like the BBC became click bait stories about celebrities or stories linked to other BBC content rather than 'real news' but I'm reluctant to pay for the news. Mind you I was like that from a young age - I'd nick newspapers and magazines from John Menzies and I never had a tv license...

The BBC don’t really have the same excuse as everyone else; or less of one at any rate, given how they are funded.

The Guardian are quite an interesting case as well; I mean the newspaper of trust fund kids, is literally a trust fund kid, substantially financed by an endowment from its creator which has been shrewdly invested over the years.

Whil it doesn’t cover all their costs, I expect it’s why they can provide stuff unpaywalled that broadsheet rivals cannot - however, it has also taken them partly down a clickbait route as well. It has with most of the msm tbf. They increasingly resemble the internet sewers.

 

[vasco de gama]

The BBC don’t really have the same excuse as everyone else; or less of one at any rate, given how they are funded.

You'd think so but the US version of the BbC 'news' is definitely very dumbed down with an incredible amount of news stories centred on 'popular culture' and there's never a day that goes by without a story linked to Elon Musk in one way or another.

 

[hibadelic]

The BBC don’t really have the same excuse as everyone else; or less of one at any rate, given how they are funded.

The Guardian are quite an interesting case as well; I mean the newspaper of trust fund kids, is literally a trust fund kid, substantially financed by an endowment from its creator which has been shrewdly invested over the years.

Whil it doesn’t cover all their costs, I expect it’s why they can provide stuff unpaywalled that broadsheet rivals cannot - however, it has also taken them partly down a clickbait route as well. It has with most of the msm tbf. They increasingly resemble the internet sewers.

I read the other day that the Guardian is going to introduce some form of paywall soon.

 

[Findlayhibby]

I subscribe to a few papers including the Washington Post and NewYork Times but I’m afraid I’m in the camp of’l’ll read that later’ and hardly ever do.I get my main opinion pieces from emails from sites like Counterfire and Conter and. Animal rights activists and stuff like Hope not Hate etc.I get RedLetters updates from the SWPa
Nd i still subscribe to the Face magazine.But mainly I buy Mojo and Uncut and Private Eye.I watch the BBC and Al Jazeera.

 

[Two Headed Boy]

Devils advocate - a lot of these playing to their crowd internet news sites going out of business might not be a bad thing. BuzzFeed and Vice dead... Fingers crossed Spiked are next.

 

[egb_hibs]

I subscribe to a few papers including the Washington Post and NewYork Times but I’m afraid I’m in the camp of’l’ll read that later’ and hardly ever do.I get my main opinion pieces from emails from sites like Counterfire and Conter and. Animal rights activists and stuff like Hope not Hate etc.I get RedLetters updates from the SWPa
Nd i still subscribe to the Face magazine.But mainly I buy Mojo and Uncut and Private Eye.I watch the BBC and Al Jazeera.

You and Archie could do with some balance in your diet Moaty.

I read the guardian and bbc for the establishment view, the Torygraph for the right, the times for a bit of both, and I rely on big G’s links for updates from the revolution.

 

[Archie]

You and Archie could do with some balance in your diet Moaty.

I read the guardian and bbc for the establishment view, the Torygraph for the right, the times for a bit of both, and I rely on big G’s links for updates from the revolution.

Oh I get plenty roughage. But what do people make of this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[egb_hibs]

Devils advocate - a lot of these playing to their crowd internet news sites going out business might not be bad thing. BuzzFeed and Vice dead... Fingers crossed Spiked are next.

Vice used to do some good serious stuff, embedding folk with ISIS was ballsy af for example. But they ran out of moolah for that sort of thing a long while back I think.

 

[Sancho Panza]

Private Eye and The Economist are about the only things I bother with. Was a life-long Grauniad reader but now wouldn't wipe my arse with it. Since Katherine Viner became the editor it's turned into an absolute rag. Hope they go bust. It's tragic what has happened to a once great newspaper. Fuck 'em.

 

[egb_hibs]

Oh I get plenty roughage. But what do people make of this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Oil town bricking it that the London set will hump them?

 

[egb_hibs]

Private Eye and The Economist are about the only things I bother with. Was a life-long Grauniad reader but now wouldn't wipe my arse with it. Since Katherine Viner became the editor it's turned into an absolute rag. Hope they go bust. It's tragic what has happened to a once great newspaper. Fuck 'em.

It is a tabloid now, facing off to the Mail rather than the Times or Torygraph; but I don’t think she started it. In fact I think she’s done a good job in getting them off their Jew baiting obsessions - I seem to recall reading that anti semitic crime used to spike each time they went on one of their benders. It’s mostly not like that anymore.

In any case, it’s a far cry from the days of Hugo Young et al. Many of its recently prominent columnists are now on UnHerd (as well as scattered across the times and telegraph) after being chased out for being too Jewish / Female / Christian / etc, or not being able to stomach its descent.

 

[Purple & Green]

The only paper i subscribe to is wsc and only because I’ve got a ridiculous lifetime deal.

Should really subscribe to more, but I don’t know what.

 

[Archie]

Oil town bricking it that the London set will hump them?

I'm more thinking of the FM tweeting calling Labour 'traitors'.

 

[egb_hibs]

The only paper i subscribe to is wsc and only because I’ve got a ridiculous lifetime deal.

Should really subscribe to more, but I don’t know what.

IMO there is no good single choice. They are all now so partisan that reading across the tribal lines is the only way to form half a picture of events as they possibly might actually be.

 

[egb_hibs]

I'm more thinking of the FM tweeting calling Labour 'traitors'.

Has he? Is that not the headline writers. He might have used the word betrayal but that’s standard politician vocabulary.

 

[Archie]

Has he? Is that not the headline writers. He might have used the word betrayal but that’s standard politician vocabulary.

He posted the front page from last week!

 

[egb_hibs]

He posted the front page from last week!

Sorry I’m not a twitter user - is this one of these where someone becomes responsible for what they retweet? Seems to me he’s just retweeted a newspaper bashing is rivals. I don’t really see a big deal.

 

[Archie]

Sorry I’m not a twitter user - is this one of these where someone becomes responsible for what they retweet? Seems to me he’s just retweeted a newspaper bashing is rivals. I don’t really see a big deal.

He has led a response calling his rivals traitors.

 

[EH17 Jimmy]

Does no one miss the Daily Sport or the Daily Star?

Top notch insights like.

 

[Sancho Panza]

It is a tabloid now, facing off to the Mail rather than the Times or Torygraph; but I don’t think she started it. In fact I think she’s done a good job in getting them off their Jew baiting obsessions - I seem to recall reading that anti semitic crime used to spike each time they went on one of their benders. It’s mostly not like that anymore.

In any case, it’s a far cry from the days of Hugo Young et al. Many of its recently prominent columnists are now on UnHerd (as well as scattered across the times and telegraph) after being chased out for being too Jewish / Female / Christian / etc, or not being able to stomach its descent.

Mate, this is a prime example of why I no longer read the Guardian. A MAN did this. Not a woman. You know it, so stop fucking lying. If you lie about something so basic, I'll assume that you'll lie about anything. How the fuck have we come to this?

Cat killer guilty of murdering stranger as he walked home in Oxford

Scarlet Blake, 26, brutally attacked Jorge Martin Carreno, 30, and left him to drown in July 2021

www.theguardian.com

 

[egb_hibs]

Mate, this is a prime example of why I no longer read the Guardian. A MAN did this. Not a woman. You know it, so stop fucking lying. If you lie about something so basic, I'll assume that you'll lie about anything. How the fuck have we come to this?

Cat killer guilty of murdering stranger as he walked home in Oxford

Scarlet Blake, 26, brutally attacked Jorge Martin Carreno, 30, and left him to drown in July 2021

www.theguardian.com

I saw that earlier. It’s fckn incredible. I was thinking that really doesn’t sound like the behaviour of a women so I googled, and sure enough.

Let us be clear; the sun, the mail, the star, even the Sunday sport, did not lie in such a systematic and profound way, and as a matter of policy. They are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter reality, not just misrepresent it.

 

[egb_hibs]

He has led a response calling his rivals traitors.

Did he say it or has he passed on negative press coverage ? I’m no fan of Humza but I’m struggling to get worked up about this.

 

[Archie]

I saw that earlier. It’s fckn incredible. I was thinking that really doesn’t sound like the behaviour of a women so I googled, and sure enough.

Let us be clear; the sun, the mail, the star, even the Sunday sport, did not lie in such a systematic and profound way, and as a matter of policy. They are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter reality, not just misrepresent it.

The gender stuff in the Guardian is bonkers. It has shifted a bit recently, but Sonia Sodhia in the Observer has been much better.

 

[Findlayhibby]

You and Archie could do with some balance in your diet Moaty.

I read the guardian and bbc for the establishment view, the Torygraph for the right, the times for a bit of both, and I rely on big G’s links for updates from the revolution.

I was told to do that when I was attending Newbattle.Read what you can.But it is like Question Time.If there is someone on who I fundamentally disagree with I turn over.Otherwise I’m likely to kick in my telly.

 

[Findlayhibby]

Something you should understand being an ex casual.

 

[egb_hibs]

I was told to do that when I was attending Newbattle.Read what you can.But it is like Question Time.If there is someone on who I fundamentally disagree with I turn over.Otherwise I’m likely to kick in my telly.

lol. We all get irritated by things Moaty but it’s worth making the effort. The papers you mention all represent the same elite world view, which can never be more than a partial truth even when they’re not manufacturing reality for ideological purposes. It would be the same if you read only the Torygraph and the Mail. I think it’s difficult to understand what’s going on in the country or the world if you only read from the left, or from the right.

 

[egb_hibs]

I also think it’s better for you as a person (I don’t mean you specifically, I mean any of us). A lot of the tribalism, viciousness and outright dehumanisation of the day comes from people being locked in their ideological bubbles.

 

[Archie]

I also think it’s better for you as a person (I don’t mean you specifically, I mean any of us). A lot of the tribalism, viciousness and outright dehumanisation of the day comes from people being locked in their ideological bubbles.

I agree with this. I had a pal who got the Daily Telegraph for specialist jobs pages. It wasn't that unusual to read obits of obscure Tory MPs and find out they had been incredibly brave war heroes or, whisper it, 'confirmed bachelors'. But tbh I find the Telegraph pretty undemanding.

 

[egb_hibs]

The gender stuff in the Guardian is bonkers. It has shifted a bit recently, but Sonia Sodhia in the Observer has been much better.

She’s pretty brave; maybe they’ve decided they need to back off after Suzanne Moore, Hadley Freeman and Sarah Ditum jumped / were pushed out. Maybe Sodhia gets a bit of cover from her colour - it is the guardian after all.

Whatever the case, I agree she is like a beacon in their madhouse.

Tbh though, her aside, of their columnists today only Kenan Malik, Jonathan Freedland, Larry Elliot and John Harris appear to be citizens of planet earth. I’m sure I’ve forgot someone, but it really is full of mentals and the venomous. I’m sure something like the daily mail is as bad, but I never really look at it unless clicking on an article linked somewhere else. The Times and the Telegraph certainly are not. I mean they’ve got the odd mentalist but it’s the exception not the norm.

 

[egb_hibs]

I agree with this. I had a pal who got the Daily Telegraph for specialist jobs pages. It wasn't that unusual to read obits of obscure Tory MPs and find out they had been incredibly brave war heroes or, whisper it, 'confirmed bachelors'. But tbh I find the Telegraph pretty undemanding.

I’m not sure what undemanding means here, genuinely? Like every other it has declined. I only first read many years into my newspaper reading being steeped in your standard Scottish prejudices. I first picked it up after reading it was ‘fleet streets paper’, read across the divide because the clarity of the division between its objective reportage and subjective opinion pieces.

I found that to be true initially - I mean it switched to support labour in the 90s because it believed them a better party than its tribal allegiance (the reverse simply unimaginable at the guardian). But like all others this seems to me to be fraying.

I’m trying to figure out what you mean by undemanding and I can’t. I’m not sure I find any paper demanding. Could you explain ?

 

[egb_hibs]

I think a big difference between the times and the telegraph and the guardian, is that if there is an article about some war somewhere, you’ll get an ex colonel or defence staff member writing on it, in the guardian you’ll get the views of a PPE grad whose never worked outside journalism. On some diplomatic stramash you’ll get an ex ambassador or diplomat vs a PPE grad. On business you’ll get an ex CEO or BoE type vs a PPE grad, etc.

 

[Archie]

I’m not sure what undemanding means here, genuinely? Like every other it has declined. I only first read many years into my newspaper reading being steeped in your standard Scottish prejudices. I first picked it up after reading it was ‘fleet streets paper’, read across the divide because the clarity of the division between its objective reportage and subjective opinion pieces.

I found that to be true initially - I mean it switched to support labour in the 90s because it believed them a better party than its tribal allegiance (the reverse simply unimaginable at the guardian). But like all others this seems to me to be fraying.

I’m trying to figure out what you mean by undemanding and I can’t. I’m not sure I find any paper demanding. Could you explain ?

I think compared to other broadsheets it didn't have the depth. I don't just mean the FT, but the Times for all the Murdoch issues, seemed to have more oomph. The Telegraph also got a bit bonkers about Johnson. But it's sports writing is great.

 

[egb_hibs]

I think compared to other broadsheets it didn't have the depth. I don't just mean the FT, but the Times for all the Murdoch issues, seemed to have more oomph. The Telegraph also got a bit bonkers about Johnson. But its sports writing is great.

I can’t say I’ve noticed that but fair dos. I haven’t read the FT for a while cos of the paywall - used to be able to do so in former jobs via corporate subscriptions- but don’t you think it’s intriguing how similar to the guardian it is? I know you don’t think this but I think some others labour under the impression big business is full of stuffy bourgeois reactionaries rather than woker than thou private sector gaurdianistas.

I actually don’t know who the telegraph’s target audience is, beyond caricatured retired colonels. I think it does retain an audience in the above circles for its more literate economic and geopolitical coverage but its worldview ? Not that I can see.

 

[Archie]

I can’t say I’ve noticed that but fair dos. I haven’t read the FT for a while cos of the paywall - used to be able to do so in former jobs via corporate subscriptions- but don’t you think it’s intriguing how similar to the guardian it is? I know you don’t think this but I think some others labour under the impression big business is full of stuffy bourgeois reactionaries rather than woker than thou private sector gaurdianistas.

I actually don’t know who the telegraph’s target audience is, beyond caricatured retired colonels. I think it does retain an audience in the above circles for its more literate economic and geopolitical coverage but its worldview ? Not that I can see.

The old adage about the FT was that, because it was primarily concerned with money, you got less spin and bullshit.