Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

How is CNN, Fox News and the sinclair group, working out for you guys?

I trust state paid media in the EU, way more than any US news media.

The reason why most EU countries have state paid media, is so that its non commercial, non partisan, and cant be bought. There are different principles in place, so government has no say, in what is broadcast/not broadcast. This also means that all political parties get the same amount of exposure etc.



CNN isn't great journalism, but it isn't the only source of information.

The problems with Fox News and Sinclair aren't based on advertising, they are based on ownership. State sponsored media isn't going to be any better under an autocrat and will in fact be worse than the situation in the US because there may not be any other options.


I don't read news but I'm sure that GDPR would hurt the smaller, independent news websites or aggregators that people find reputable more than CNN, Fox News and sinclair group. The latter at least have TV advertising. Their website is just horizontal integration for them.


New York Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe?

Those are three publications that have sent shockwaves around the world with their privately-funded investigative journalism.


I used to like WP but especially since Trump they've almost become a single-issue publication following every fart of that guy, and a lot of it is way overblown and they leave out "details" and overstate the importance of others. I loved their investigative series such as the one about asset forfeiture, lots of investigation; the Trump reporting instead is more "instigation" than "investigation". And I can't open the comment section any more, it's like the Fox News comment section only the opposite.

What I dislike about all news sites is that they are inconsequential. They throw sooooo many different news items at you that it really does not matter. Today's outrage will be quite forgotten two days later, or two weeks if it was something really bad. They should instead follow a few selected topics long-term and investigate what happens, and point readers to ways to affect a change. That means not reporting on each and every little thing as extensively any more but instead focus on a few things over a very long time. Just being fed thousands of news stories is McNews - you get short term satisfaction and a feeling that you stuffed something into your brain, but it feels hollow quickly because it's not very nutritious.

And don't get me started on all the Russia hype, one would think those guys in their in large parts poor 3rd world country have capabilities far beyond what the orders of magnitude richer West does not (I speak some Russian and was there a few times, also in Ukraine). That all the media jumped so willingly on this wagon is quite amazing. Note that I don't doubt they (Russian) did most of what is claimed, but when, for example, sums of money spent for the campaign are mentioned it's so little that it's obvious it could not have had a significant impact, at least not on the scale fitting the amount and the tone of the reporting. What is also missing is that they take the opportunity to talk about the many ways the US and the West has influenced internal politics of other countries. For controversial topics they usually try to give such views some room, but Russia seems so incredibly overblown and one-sided to me - so impossible, and it all looks like that recent video about Sinclair where they all say the exact same things and one can see not much effort went into that reporting. I don't know, it all feels very weird - and very wrong, like when you put on very strong glasses and the world looks weird.


Absolutely, and they would benefit from the end of ad supported, low quality but free online news. All three are subscription funded.



That article is literally about 60% of their revenue being from subscriptions.


> How is CNN, Fox News and the sinclair group, working out for you guys?

Not well, and I'd add MSNBC to that list, however much I may be a dirty pinko who agrees with their editorial stance. NPR and PRI do what they can, but I really wish we had something like the BBC here, with non-corporate funding and a remit to report current events.


You do have some very reputable newspapers though (NY Times, WSJ), which are subscription funded and hence losing out to the free ad funded stuff.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: