Is mainstream media dying?
When I was young teenager I would always ask myself why I was beginning to get bored with all the information coming from the television. I never really felt any interest in television programming and series found on programs while everyone else was glued to these. I didn’t know if this was just me or what.
I had it in the back of my mind the burning question of why the hell isn’t there any programming that is more wholesome or at least something that feels as if you are learning something. Nobody wants to burn the time of their day. But I think I was wrong with that notion.
People waste their time on so much drivel. I try to spend time on my work, writing and music. I wish more people would be more inclined to digest information that will allow them to expand. With true information. I’ve come to an understanding that people are at different levels and enjoy different forms of entertainment.
Yet, recently I’ve come to hold the view as many of my contemporaries may suggest is that the mainstream media feels like it’s dying. This can be due to a lot of reasons I see currently and arriving on the coming horizon. There is Trump, there is the work of Wikileaks, there is the onslaught and juggernaut of independent media that is aiming it’s teeth on the mainstream media.
And finally, social media has obviously made communications and incredibly fast and responsive medium that bullshit becomes roasted faster than your grandma’s ham and pies. A crowd source of information via anonymous people and tips may come to consume the legacy media. Many people don’t understand this and few talk about it. I will bring context to what is happening.
Trump is an example of how the mainstream media completely threw everything they had at the president elect. Regardless of your political views, they were clearly not impartial. Trump represented a clear threat to the mainstream media. Trump as president-elect proved several pundits and journalists incorrect. People begin to see and make the connection and assumption that if all these journalists and pundits were wrong about him, could they be wrong about everything else? The answer is yes.
What if these people don’t actually know what they are talking about. Maybe their bias is guiding everything they say, feel and think. What you see today is a continued burning candle against any microscopic event Trump does or says held to ludicrous scrutiny. People have not forgotten the media that believed he would not become President elect. Credibility is tanking. I don’t think it’s completely understood how they are distracted on attempting to eliminate the very real existential threat that reduced their credibility and they continue to sink themselves.
Trump could not have won without some of the the following facets I’ve headlined.
Wikileaks and their revelations about the DNC and their collusion with news organizations should send flags up to people that are curious, free-thinkers and people that see through the smoke. When I heard this it assuaged by suspicions I and many people had. That news organizations are essentially propaganda arms for the Democrats, that are not only bias, but outright cheat for their campaigns. This is how you lose credibility. Everyone sees between the mist and smells the crap.
With so many independent news sources propping up in every avenue and corner of the internet, corporate interests should be very concerned. They do not hold the same amount of influence they once did. Independent news sources are hacking out the heads of big news names. There are several nodes on the news fronts and many are independent and they are gaining steam, influence and credibility.
There are all kinds of news that are bombastic in their headlines which is widely common today but they may attempt to remain factual wherever possible. There is much more competition now and people competing for attention that makes it a challenge to gather and keep attention. But I can see the independent news sites gathering numbers, subscribers, email lists etc. The media will continue to say that these people are irrelevant as more of the general public watch these independent news sources and find them to be credible.
It’s a matter of fact checking the fact checkers.
Social media added to the fire of this fuel of independent media versus conventional legacy media. One tweet retweeted thousand of times can get millions of impressions, possibly more viewings and eyeballs get locked on to it than regular old media. The faster information moves the faster people must adapt because there is a lot to be understood by the mechanics and conventions of this. YouTube, Facebook, twitter, periscope. People must understand that everyone is their own broadcasting network and this will be undermined by the traditional mainstream media, because it reduces their power, credibility, voice and ultimately money.
Social media allows people inject their opposing view on an article. Moreover, the BS is highlighted and gets “up-voted” to the top.
All of the modern institutions today will continue to scoff at independent media but it will only sink to itself as it can longer thrive in a market where it is vastly free and based on a 21st Century system which requires a new understanding, new vision. People no longer want bullshit. As the speed of communication has increased as has the ability to decipher and call out bullshit.
If the mainstream media could watch themselves with a live stream chat of what people’s thoughts are they would be surprised. I already think they are beginning to get it to a degree as today they are devaluing themselves in the market of news by to muting and disabling their own comments section, which they will realize is a great disservice to themselves and to their dwindling numbers.People that actually watch MSM today are acclimated to it, it’s routine. They are set in their ways. They are out for confirmation bias. Confirmation bias let’s us understand the world in easy accessible patterns that have preordained in our own minds, “See, I knew it I was right.” It’s for those that seek what they understand and they don’t challenge themselves. I don’t know if it’s a dumbing down for the general public or what but for a good portion the media underestimates the intelligence of it’s audience.
The most recent trend on social media I see is to call these independent news sites “fake news.” But this is from news organizations and people that have had many blunders in their past and people that hold MSM to highest regard and trust, with little to no scrutiny. Mockery, ridicule and sarcasm is often expressed when someone shares from these kinds of sites if they don’t align with others personal views or politics. I think it’s a convergence of mainstream media losing it’s power and online independence causing a very real tangible storm. Thus, the MSM has to denounce and deflect and ridicule as “fake news.” They are not teaching this in college.
Every time the mainstream media wants to attack the “poor journalism” of an independent, the Streisand Effect comes into full play. Whenever something is not want to be seen, it will be seen. Especially online.
It’s only a matter of time. It’s kind of like how banned books become more tasty and enjoyable because you are told you shouldn’t read. More eyeballs jump on whatever subject that has cast on it a negative light or is not wanting attention.
Hello? People have phones in their back pockets! MSM underestimates the curiosity of it’s audience. Talking about an independent news source may have the opposite effect for MSM, it may provide conversion to the curious and those willing to challenge their per-existing patterns of thought. It’s the kind of censorship of ideas and of the truthful that will be Achilles heel of the MSM.
The Indie news has become anti-fragile in the sense that you can try to bust their balls, but that’s where they gain strength. As I suggested with the Streisand effect, whatever the intention of MSM, attention good-or-bad sets a door upon a large audience willing to enter it. MSM should understand that it is a double-edged sword to call out opposition, indie news source. As those that are critical may deem them better than your network, while also others will clue in, and explore new web-space. A lot of things that would be impractical for MSM to do, an independent source would do it and with gusto!
Economy of time and Economy of money allows for MSM and independent popularity flips. All kinds of social media makes it easily accessible for the layman to start typing whatever to their hearts content. Blogs, Video, Miro-Blogging services have a very little start-up cost. Everyone has a phone they can use for Instagram, periscope and boom people gain a presence.
If information is the key to the free market of ideas, then the production costs/value is not absolutely necessary. People will seek what speaks to them. Who would have thought that flashy expensive sets and production and poor integrity would be a match for people to adapt and find some other new source.
Finally, unlike MSM independent media is not typically owned or controlled by any interests. This alone, causes a tremendous deadlock on the ability to talk about certain topics on the MSM. If someone is paying your bills, you can’t really speak about him or his country/brand/corporation etc. Would you?
Sensationalism, cover-ups, censorship and narrow thinking can not win in the marketplace of free ideas. I think if an MSM host is great they would fair just as good in an independent environment, given that they have the audience that would convert. But I can see the landscape changing and evolving very fast. It’s an inspiring time for independence. The possibility for truth, integrity and evolution is very near. It’s a very refreshing time. Do you disagree with my ideas? How do you see the near-future evolving as internet evolves with social media? Let me know your thoughts below. Few talks about this.
Please share if you enjoy the content.