Books were the main source of information for centuries, but before that, there were stories told by word of mouth. And now, there is the internet and with the internet, all sorts of channels of information: social media, podcasts, online versions of news magazines, etc. This has led to an influx of information and now more than ever the consumers have to learn to criticize the information themselves. It is not anymore the problem of getting the information to the world, but rather the popularity of the news.
With more click based information the longer and more in depth stories suffer. It’s only logical that, in these days of quick internet connection and powerful portable devices, many sources compete with the attention of the consumer and it is easier and more profitable to catch the attention with a shocking headline rather than a headline that tells a story with months of investigation and research.
Another issue with the popularity being held as the meter of “good news” (read: more valuable to the advertisers, and from there to the stockholders) is that the bad news or unpopular opinions may be right in the long run, but the more black and white kind of four word headline bring more readers. This leads to a problem of how to keep objective journalism alive.
The quality of information has also gotten a big hit from the definition of news being changed to include opinion pieces and information sent from troll factories or similar sources with no way of knowing absolutely what can be trusted and what not. This leads to another problem, which is how to define the quality of news/ information. I want to state that the information you have read from some guy on Facebook isn’t on the same level as the article in the Washington Post.
It is not that there aren\’t problems with big media houses, but at least they have some sort of critique and usually have some proof to their claims, as they put their name and money on the line. If you think for example, Twitter feeds, there isn\’t much of a source being put on the line. Maybe getting banned from the forum, but it doesn’t take long to make a new account and start again.
In the end, this leads to a situation where the credibility is not seen anymore as coming from the source, but rather the content. If the information is favourable to the consumer, the consumer is more likely to agree with it. This is very bad. Losing faith in facts is a road to polarization and dividing people even more with the producers of the information holding the keys.
Leave a Reply