Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>But the real issue is that media (not just digital) has ZERO incentive to change their practices. Attention is the currency of media and since controversy and sensationalism draw more eyeballs, they are used by actors across the spectrum to enhance their audience size and their revenue. Google and FB use this to their advantage by providing no market basis for their price.

Why include "media" in this? This is uniquely a Google and Facebook problem. The old world of media had dedicated ad sellers, and rudimentary demographic information, to pitch and price their ad inventory to ad buyers. It's a world of people actually vetting things at every stage.

Podcast ads still work this way because Apple isn't an ad-tech company and they have dominant share of podcast players. Spotify is trying to "ad-techify" podcast advertising as we speak.

Not at all true. Mediums such as (film, broadcastTV, CableTV, print, radio all use the same tactics to enhance their ratings / viewers / audience. Media is a word to describe the sector - communications, distribution, etc.

The so-called traditional media skirt any so-called ethics and publish what gets them the most attention. Their ads are not subject to any overview aside from the FTC's loose rules on TIA and the whims of management. This is why Fox News is able to thrive, there is no requirement to be correct or accurate or even fair... Hence the irony of their long time tag line.

Next time you see that ad for unlimited bandwidth or a money back guarantee or a "free" what ever, note the medium. Its everywhere on every medium.

Not give the example that proves the rule but...

Don't watch him much but from what I've seen Chris Wallace from what I've seen actually tries to practice professional journalism on fox.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact