Huge surprise: people don't want to pay for newspapers when they used to be free.

[PingSpike]

I'm already paying the maximum amount I'm willing to pay for the content served up from news sites: Nothing.

 

[Craig234]

I'm already paying the maximum amount I'm willing to pay for the content served up from news sites: Nothing.

Which means you deserve no sites or content. Which means you deserve the tyranny not being a vigilant citizen gets.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Bingo. Totally correct. And that's the root of the problem. But how do you fix that?

simple - make it so everyone's votes count, and make it so congressmen aren't beholden to special interest groups (good luck with that).

personally, i think there should be a way to standardize campaign funding so that all runners who meet X requirements receive Y amount of media coverage. how you'd actually achieve that, i honestly have no clue.

 

[daishi5]

Well, that's a good question. I could try to give you a better answer but instead, I'll point to the BBC, I'll point to some of our better agencies' investigative/internal affairs departments, I'll point to how the FBI sometimes needs to investigate its bosses of elected and senior officials, I'll point ot the GAO - it can be done. But you the the nail on the head with Bush - it needs protection, just as he politicized the US Attorneys who have long had inadequate protection.

Or Nixon, who tried to abuse the CIA and his national security priviliges into getting the FBI not to investigate Watergate.

Do you really want more details?

Is the BBC government funded? Do you have any examples of the BBC revealing government corruption at a high level, where the interests of the BBC were at odds? I know the BBC is a good news organization, but I don't remember them ever shedding bad light on the government, like in the lead up to Iraq maybe? Again, I am ignorant. I could search, but such a search would take a long time, and I presume you have some evidence they have served as a watchdog against government corruption.

 

[Fern]

There was an interview with two people on this - Bill Moyers IIRC - who made some very good points that lead to a controversial recommendation.

The background is important - the role of investigative journalism as monitor of the powers that be public and private and informers of the citizens as crucial to democracy.

They pointed out how most of the media we consume from tv to talk radio to web sites is mostly based on stories by print reporters doing the actual investigating and reporting - who are shrinking to nothing.

-snip-

Yes, investigative jouralism is very important. Unfortunately it's a dying art, and seems we see fewer quality pieces as time goes on.

I still subscribe to my local newspaper, a NYT subsidiary. It's mostly a collection of AP stories, all the local reporting is fluff (a car wreck her, a home fire there, a business closing, another opening etc. There is absolutely no investigative journalism practised whatsoever. We city & county government, yet they can't seem to be bothered to watch it, to investigate it.

If you don't train journalists at the local level where they start out, how will have decent investigative journalists at the national level?

Seems everybody in journalism nowadays wants to be a celeb opinion type giving their analysis on a national news show.

Fern

 

[Craig234]

Yes, investigative jouralism is very important. Unfortunately it's a dying art, and seems we see fewer quality pieces as time goes on.

I still subscribe to my local newspaper, a NYT subsidiary. It's mostly a collection of AP stories, all the local reporting is fluff (a car wreck her, a home fire there, a business closing, another opening etc. There is absolutely no investigative journalism practised whatsoever. We city & county government, yet they can't seem to be bothered to watch it, to investigate it.

If you don't train journalists at the local level where they start out, how will have decent investigative journalists at the national level?

Seems everybody in journalism nowadays wants to be a celeb opinion type giving their analysis on a national news show.

Fern

Sounds like we laregly agree. But I'd say sounds like journalists want to get work and make money. It's not their fault investigative jouralism is disappearing.

 

[bruceb]

I can say right now, I will not be one that pays. Especially for that rag, The New York Times. They got my goat when they started providing the Crossword only to paying subscribers. Their rate for home delivery is reasonable, but I am out the door at 5:30AM and the paper never got there any earlier than 6AM or so. So no way will I resub again (until I fully retire and don't care what time they bring it)

A similar thing happened when a major magazine that I liked, went to fully Electronic Delivery.
First thing I did was send in a Cancellation Request. I like my magazines I can hold in my hand
and bring them where ever I want to read them.

 

[Slew Foot]

Welcome to the twitter generation. If it doesnt fit in 140 characters, its not important.

 

[palehorse]

Is Amazon still charging for RSS feeds -- that are otherwise free -- on their Kindles? Just curious...