The Splice Slugs: Trump’s election, lies and the failure of journalism
I’m trying to avoid filling this newsletter with media self-flagellation. But you can’t go through a week like this without reflecting on the role of media. I’m at a media donors conference in Prague and this will dominate our conversations when the meetings start this morning.
Put simply, big media blew it. Everything we’ve come to expect from media who call themselves fair, neutral or even necessary in modern democracies have found themselves ineffective in the anticipating the rise of Trump.
As Matt Ingram wrote on Twitter, “So all the fact-checking of Trump’s lies, all the investigative journalism about his failures, even the tapes — none of it meant anything.”
We’ve seen this a lot this year — Brexit and the rise of Duterte — that “thoughtful” journalism can’t compete in an era of lies and outrage expressed in social media. This is perhaps the biggest disruption in the media industry — and we’re practically blind to our growing irrelevance as professional journalists. As my friend Jenny Chan put it, “We need a media reset.”
This is biggest learning for me this year: We need to accept that there’s no longer such a thing as “mainstream” media; there is no single collective thought but a fragmented social experience made up of various shades of fact, truths and myths.
But here’s the thing: Technology affords us the ability to understand, create and distribute content for a diverse audience. We’re not using it. If I were an investor today, I would invest in companies that are creating platforms and tools to create and deliver content to narrower audiences. We must do a better job listening. — Alan Soon
More views on the implications for journalism from Margaret Sullivan at Washington Post — “Although we journalists try to portray ourselves as cynical sometimes, or hard-bitten, we can also be idealistic, even naive.”
…And another. “Journalists didn’t question the polling data when it confirmed their gut feeling that Mr. Trump could never in a million years pull it off. They portrayed Trump supporters who still believed he had a shot as being out of touch with reality.”
I’m a big fan of the On The Media podcast. This week, a day after the election, they recorded their editorial meeting on tape. Like many media, they’re struggling with the big question: Now what?After all the hard work that went into disproving Trump’s assertions, is it still worth carrying on? Listen to this; it’s just 17 minutes — an unedited barrage. I think it accurately captures the anger and frustration in the journalistic community.
There are also a lot of fingers pointing at Facebook and the way its algos distribute content — true or false. “The fact that these decisions are being made by algorithms rather than human editors doesn’t make Facebook any less responsible for the harmful effect on its users and the broader society.”
…And of course, Facebook is on the defensive. “While Facebook played a part in this election, it was just one of many ways people received their information — and was one of the many ways people connected with their leaders, engaged in the political process and shared their views.”
…As it turns out, there are a bunch of teens in Macedonia that have been creating lots of traffic around fake content in support of Trump — and making money off it.
There’s a new role in journalism: the digital fixer — someone who helps journalists find their way into closed online communities.These roles will be essential if we’re going to listen and report on diverse views. “Digital fixing is unlike typical fixing in that it is not currently a paid role. Rather, it operates in the currency of personal trust.”
Business Insider dropped comments from its articles. “Over time the value of our comments section has diminished, with a small but outspoken group increasingly resorting to name-calling and worse.” There’s a clear need to create better ways to engage and listen.
Two media groups in the UK are trying to get Facebook and Google to fund public service reporting in the country. They’re seeking a 1% levy on the operations of the two companies to pay for independent and non-profit journalism.
China passed a cybersecurity law that is causing a bit of worry for foreign companies. The government says the laws will stop cyberattacks and terrorism by requiring security checks on companies in finance and communications. It will also require that all data is stored in China itself.
If you haven’t heard of the Chinese news aggregation app Toutiao (it means “headlines”), this will get your attention: It may get a $10 billion valuation. Toutiao has powerful ad-tech behind it, allowing advertisers to target specific consumer segments according to age, location and interest.
Vice launched in Indonesia through a partnership with Jawa Pos TV. It will produce local content and offer creative agency services. An odd place to do that.
Here’s a look at a Vietnamese startup that’s trying to be the Slack of Southeast Asia. One of their cooler features: Read/receive tracking.
Apple News is starting to deliver more traffic to publishers. CNN for example, says it got a 7.3x increase from August to September alone thanks to new tweaks including breaking news notifications. Monetization however is still a “work in progress”.
Wouldn’t it be great if a cow could send a text to a farmer to say she’s sick or pregnant? Yes they can.
Enjoy the weekend!
a.
Deals
Do you find it challenging scheduling meetings with people? I do. You should check out what Mimetic is doing to make this easier. You tell an AI bot (she’s called Evie, btw) to coordinate the meeting. And it happens. Check it out here. And apply the promo code ALAN25 at checkout to get 25% off.
From our readers
“I firmly believe that what shapes online news media ultimately shakes out and shapes the future digital marketing and communications industry. I read Splice’s newsletter religiously.” — Keith Morrison
