SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[...] HuffPost in the US today announced that it is sunsetting its contributors platform — also known as its unpaid blogger platform.
The news was broken by HuffPost itself (which, like TechCrunch, is part of Oath, owned by gigantic carrier Verizon), which directly tied the move to the changing tides (not Tide Pods, although I personally think there is a connection) in the world of news media and how technology is used to distribute it.
"Now, there are many places where people can share and exchange ideas," HuffPost editor in chief Lydia Polgreen writes in a post on the site.
"Perhaps a few too many: One of the biggest challenges we all face, in an era where everyone has a platform, is figuring out whom to listen to. Open platforms that once seemed radically democratizing now threaten, with the tsunami of false information we all face daily, to undermine democracy. When everyone has a megaphone, no one can be heard. Our hope is that by listening carefully through all the noise, we can find the voices that need to be heard and elevate them for all of you."
[...] I'll be interested to see if HuffPost's move signals more of these unpaid blogger platforms (ahem, Forbes) changing tack, and just as significantly whether these sites can find the magic formula to replace it in their revenue streams if and when they do.
Source: TechCrunch
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday January 20 2018, @07:56PM
Yeah, I mean it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that the "news media" is really mostly an entertainment industry which will whore themselves out in whatever way will sell ads the most -- and Trump has always said outrageous things that sell newspapers and get people to watch ads.
No, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with that... despite the fact that said "news media" continues to cover Trump like crazy every time he does something outrageous, because they know it will attract viewers... and despite the fact that he's already President now and has been for a year, so it can't really be part of some conspiracy theory to pair Trump against Clinton anymore.
Yes, some Dems definitely thought Trump would be an easier opponent than some others, and perhaps they were wrong. But that's not why the news media covered Trump then, nor why it continues to cover him now.
And as for your stat that 1/3 of voters didn't know who Bernie was, about 1/3 of Americans can't find the Pacific Ocean on a world map. 1/3 of American voters believe that Obama was born in Kenya. 1/3 of American voters believe that vaccines cause autism. And lets not even start on the higher numbers of Americans who believe silly things about aliens or angels or the Virgin Mary or whatever else. Were there some in the news media who clearly favored Clinton and tried to downplay Bernie? Absolutely.
But you don't need to postulate some super conspiracy theory to explain a lot of this. The news media, even as it was providing more coverage of the Clinton campaign than the Bernie campaign, also devoted significant time to controversies about Clinton (emails, Benghazi, etc.). It's usually about what's most sensationalistic.
[For the record, I am not and was never a supporter of Clinton.]