When Everyone Is A Journalist: A Story of Incentives
Traditional news media is failing us.
Let’s examine how they lost their way and what we the people can do to reclaim journalism…
As we master the craft of educating ourselves online, we have less need for institutionalized learning and less interest in TV pundits interpreting the news for us. We skip the newsroom and go directly to the source for our information; gathering vast amounts of farm-to-table data to make our own organic decisions. In the process, we eliminate the need for the mother bird to chew up our daily news before feeding it to us. In response to this sudden change in our news environment, we’ve evolved a sharp nose for identifying bullshit. Such bullshit, in the form of purposeful misinformation and propaganda, can be found in print, online articles, cable newsrooms, political interviews, religious sermons, conversations with friends, and some bathroom stalls. How is it that wealthy media outlets such as FOX, CNN, and MSNBC can’t afford to maintain a high level of journalistic objectivity?
For-Profit vs. For the People
Well, it’s not actually the fault of the cable news companies. Before online video emerged, watching television meant watching commercial after commercial interrupted at strategic times by actual content. We now realize cable news networks have lost either the financial incentive or journalistic principles necessary to exercise professional research and fact-checking. Perhaps worse, cable news pundits are incentivized not to challenge or correct guests as it would threaten their access to that person throughout the rest of their career. You may think it’s their job to challenge the powerful and clarify the facts but you would be wrong. Networks are for-profit businesses and the pundits we see on TV are conscious of how they should behave so as not to lose access to high-profile individuals. Let’s break down a scenario of cable news networks making a decision guided by their profit incentive and the social ills that follow.
Imagine if an entire cable news network like CNN lost access to Donald Trump for correcting him on an issue. This all might sound absurd but here is a list of 11 news organizations banned from access to Trump after writing critical pieces. Losing access to Donald Trump early in the Republican Primaries would bleed about a year of viewer ratings and advertising revenue. And if Trump became president the network would lose access to him during his 4 or 8 years as Commander-in-Chief. Donald Trump is aware of this dilemma and has been exploiting it to gain millions of dollars in free media. Yet, the real issue is the unchallenged nature of Trump’s interaction with cable news hosts. When a pundit does challenge Trump, it’s almost always over semantics rather than his policy proposals. It’s a win-win for cable news and Donald Trump but a losing recipe for the audience hoping to educate themselves on policy specifics.
Question: What is the main incentive for news outlets and the reporters representing them?
Answers:
1). The network has an incentive to televise the reporters that are least likely to upset someone like Donald Trump.
2.) Reporters know ruffling Trump’s hair feathers would cost them airtime and the next step in the corporate ladder.
Question: What do you get when cable news networks cozy up to the powerful people they’re supposed to be questioning?
Answers:
- A lack of investigative journalism or desire to clarify facts for the audience.
- The resourceful portion of the audience leaves to find alternative news sources.
Cable News Dinosaur vs. High-Speed Browser
Somewhere between the commercial breaks, cable news journalism abandoned its high standards and doubled down on infotainment. The change went unannounced and even unnoticed by many viewers. The programs people once trusted to inform their decisions soon became heated arguments with no scientific conclusion, human interest stories meant to provoke emotion, the celebration of celebrities, and the suffocation of today’s important stories until the public no longer knew to ask for them. *Praise your favorite deity here* because we would be in trouble if cable news was our only resource today. Fortunately, for recent generations, the Internet has set our society free from this ancient revenue model; which I’ll be the first to admit was once necessary. Technology has created an evolutionary gap between the cable news dinosaur and the high-speed browser. Those born after 1965 now receive the majority of their news online according to Pew Research; a trend that will continue until there is no longer a financial incentive to operate a cable news network.
Today our search engines are efficient and our news feeds are in real-time. People can now locate the source of information they need to draw their own conclusions and oftentimes they receive that information before the cable news anchors have even had a chance to do their makeup.
The Internet has organized the answers to most of humanity’s questions and we made it as cheap and ubiquitous as possible. It’s safe to say that the giant media corporations weren’t light enough on their toes to turn the corner and many cable networks still don’t seem to understand that the ground has shifted from under them. They will continue to milk their cash cows until we are all lactose intolerant. Cable news sold their journalistic souls on national television and everyone was watching.
The Bottleneck
Although the Internet is a technological breakthrough leading us into a 4G Renaissance, there is still one thing forcing us all to keep our foot on the breaks: a bottleneck to the speed and efficiency of modern-day news retrieval. The open nature of the Internet has allowed thousands of websites and blogs to publish information under the guise of credible news outlets, often referred to as New Media.
Some of these websites parade around as credible sources but are in-fact PR firms attempting to prop-up systems that would otherwise fall victim to innovation. On the other hand, there are many dedicated organizations risking everything to deliver us the truth. It used to be easy to tell the two apart. You’d read the New York Times and that was the paper that you trusted. Maybe you’d try reading other papers before deciding which was right for you. But now media outlets are clickable links and their credibility is nearly indistinguishable even to a well-trained eye. We have been forced to become our own researchers; reading links with a healthy dose of skepticism. What was once a non-lethal dose and praiseworthy practice has now shaped us into an untrusting society. We are questioning everything we once held true. Politics. Religion. Tradition. War. Torture. Death Penalty. Poverty. Prison. Oil. Gold. Money. Drugs. Government. Health. Sex. Travel. Freedom. Happiness. Success. Knowledge. Power.
Hope on the Horizon
People today are curious, asking the right questions, and finding the answers at their fingertips. There were once the people in the know and the people that listened. These lines have been blurred and as this trend continues one should ask themselves, “What will the world look like when everyone is a journalist? How will it change the meaning of democracy? How can we give the people the power to inform others and to better inform themselves? How can we organize and project the voice of online journalists? What will it mean for the world when information, broadcasting, and organized action are as simple as updating your status? Will social media fall second to a rise in social journalism?” Many things are still uncertain. One thing I am certain of is that Credder.com will be ready when the people come calling for what’s next.
Please comment below with any questions, constructive criticism, thoughts, or topic requests in news media for us to cover in our next piece.
