pull down to refresh
I don't think the conclusion I draw from the exercise of tracing this image is that "there's at least a mechanism in the system that rewards honesty."
The fellow who first traced the fake image posted his very thorough thread within an hour or two of the fake being posted, yet I was far more likely to encounter the fake image than I was to encounter his debunking of it.
To optimism's point of not seeing the fake image on MSM: score one point for the establishment.
There are also mechanisms to proliferate dishonesty.
I didn't say the mechanism incentivizing honesty was dominant, just that it exists. I don't think it existed before.
I think the long-term benefit was staying on the right side of the feds, whose permission was required to continue broadcasting.
score one point for the establishment.
The outrage they'd be on the receiving end of over not covering their asses on stuff like this is enough reason for them to be more careful than, say, the usual FUDsters on the bird app.
There is still some journalistic integrity in the world, but we also know that there's a narrative going on and they have no choice but to report those narratives. I found it interesting that for example Al Jazeera fell into the "legality" discussion trap yesterday, much like the BBC, until an analyst remarked that this is a dumb distraction move. It's far more interesting to find out who the insiders were, and what's in it for them.
The outrage they'd be on the receiving end of over not covering their asses on stuff like this is enough reason for them to be more careful than, say, the usual FUDsters on the bird app.
While this is true, it's also the case that the usual FUDsters on the bird app are not as likely to be the target of a serious pressure campaign.
Back when media was a few thousand journalists, people who wanted to control the story had a much easier time identifying which throats to choke. These days, control is some sort of aggregate business, as we were discussing the other day, it's become more of a sybil attack.
I'm also not convinced that outrage affects anyone in the media business (MSM or small time FUDster) very much. They make money from the outrage. Worst comes to worst, they give it a day or two and move on...because everyone else certainly has.
And of the many meanings of journalistic integrity that we might come up with, I hope that it is closer to "finding out who the insiders were" than "getting the details all exactly right."
it's also the case that the usual FUDsters on the bird app are not as likely to be the target of a serious pressure campaign.
Because you can just give em some cash and they'll sing your song; broken 60s jukeboxes have more integrity because at least they won't play what they don't have. So you're right, because you don't have to pressure if you can buy. At a bigger scale, this was also how I interpreted that whole "buying the NYT" recently.
control is some sort of aggregate business
It's the one where you make people believe that they want to be controlled by you. Because your censorship, lies and self enrichment are the best thing that ever happened to them, of course. Oh and let's not forget the new wing of that college that was built with your name on it because you earmarked 50M of creditor rektness for it in a 7000 page spending bill - that is the most awesome thing anyone has ever done.
They make money from the outrage.
Many do, but I think for some, rectification hurts. Yes, there are still some newspapers left in the world that actually do this. Total self-own of course, bad for profits. They could pump out 300 stories per day but these losers only do a 100. Sad! Maybe we should invade them, kidnap their CEOs and control them too. So much money lost! Think about the money!
And of the many meanings of journalistic integrity that we might come up with, I hope that it is closer to "finding out who the insiders were" than "getting the details all exactly right."
Why?
The important thing that changed is we now have enormous choice of sources. If dishonest actors lose out on our attention to honest actors, there's at least a mechanism in the system that rewards honesty.