
Why the Public Can't Read the Press - gabbo
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/washington-trade-press/417366/?single_page=true
======
jensen123
Interesting article. However, at the end there is this idea that the
government should fund news reporting. I grew up in Norway where the
government did exactly that (the only TV channel when I was a kid was run by
the government). Thing is, that government funded news outlet almost never
said anything really critical about the government.

~~~
antimagic
This type of arrangement does actually exist already. The BBC in the UK, and
the ABC in Australia are both openly critical of governments - I know that the
political right in Australia finds the ABC overly biased to the left, and the
political left finds it overly biased to the right (although the right seems
to be a bit more serious about this - they routinely try to hamstring the ABC
when in power, whereas the left tends to increase funding).

Anyway, the point is that publicly funded broadcasters can and do criticise
their governments.

~~~
digi_owl
As do the Norwegian one. The claim that they leave the left alone have been a
empty refrain from the "libertarian" right for a generation. Their real beef
that it is funded by a fee rather than "commercially", as they have a fervent
belief in only paying for something they use (and clearly they don't "use" the
national broadcaster).

~~~
reitanqild
I'm one of the many who thinks that Norwegian press, including state TV, is
heavily biased towards the left.

I've had to change few of my strongly held beliefs a few times but I currently
maintain the view stated above. Feel free to check my posting history and feel
free to dismiss my view afterwards : )

------
rubidium
"One of the highest-profile acquisitions came in 2011 when Bloomberg—already a
behemoth in the business-intelligence sphere—bought a longtime employee-owned
trade outlet, the Bureau of National Affairs. BNA, as it is known, went for
$990 million. [...] Contrast that with the recent sales and acquisitions of
more household names in journalism. The Washington Post was sold to Amazon
founder Jeff Bezos in 2013 for $250 million. The Boston Globe sold in 2013 for
$70 million. "

Thing I learned from this article: There are real paying customers for the
news, and --surprise surprise-- it's the people whose jobs depend on it. The
bulk of the American public doesn't care enough to pay, and so won't get the
full news.

I'm not sure that there's a way around this... ideas?

~~~
protomyth
Put an synopsis version of the story outside the firewall and do the in-depth
article with reference, graphs, etc. inside the firewall. Paid subscription
with a google friendly, ad supported front-end. People who aren't going to pay
the fee probably just want the synopsis (executive summary) version anyway.

~~~
apozem
Not a bad idea, but it would only work for stories with the appropriate depth
to support a longer exploration that would make people feel like they got
their money's worth. Some stories just aren't worth more than 300 words and
don't lend themselves to major explorations.

~~~
protomyth
I've thought about this one a bit, and taken as one story what you say is
true, but I think there is no such thing as a standalone story. Links to
previous stories either by type or area, links to stats (e.g. CDC ranking of
mortality), etc. could provide some valuable context as opposed to sensational
headlines.

------
logn
What about cities and counties funding newspapers? The author thinks that
there's at least some good DC reporting from national papers and non-profit
media, but that what suffers are the local papers.

Funding at the local level could be provided by ballot initiatives that pull
money directly from taxes instead of the general budget. That way local
politicians can't influence the news too much.

People are pretty passionate about funding libraries. I could see the same
people accepting newspaper taxes.

------
johnm1019
Would be neat to see these outlets offer individuals non-commercial licenses
at heavily reduced prices. I wonder if some parts of the geek population would
enjoy access to good(better?) information.

~~~
danieltillett
This might work if they offered this some time later - say a delay of a week
might be ok.

~~~
ashark
I'd love some good monthly, quarterly, or even annual digests on the topics of
foreign affairs and certain academic disciplines that I'd like to follow but
don't have a great enough interest in to pay for and follow several major
journals to find the interesting or important bits. I'd definitely pay for
such things—though not nearly as much as the cost of the services the article
mentions as I don't need my news to be _that_ fresh or comprehensive, though
actual _good_ coverage would be appreciated.

------
vlehto
Here is an idea:

First there is put up reddit/quora mashup. List of questions submitted by
people. Ranked by up-votes. And you can dismiss questions by clicking "I have
seen this". Only catch is that everything has to be a question.

Then put bounties and deadlines for the questions. Regular users can pay to
increase the bounty. A week after the question is posted comes the deadline.
Then every article written as answer gets posted to everybody who up voted the
question.

Then the money is distributed so that 20% goes to the company running the
website, 80% is shared among the authors, closely reflecting the up votes of
paying users.

------
bstanfield
Fantastic, fantastic read.

------
personjerry
Where's the news/political startup we need?

~~~
forgottenpass
At the wrong end of a pivot into lowest common denominator trash "reporting".

The news websites have already caught up with contemporary web design, selling
of user data and subscription services. Does the tech startup playbook even
have other moves they're not using?

