> Local and major news sites alike, are cesspoools of intrusive advertising and tracking. They’re so poorly built, with so much advertising, that they hardly even function any longer.
But that's an effect, though maybe one that will create a vicious cycle. It's not the cause. The revenue rug was pulled out from under local news websites, and they're struggling to keep the lights on. Advertising and tracking are how everyone says you need to make money on the internet nowadays, and they're just following the example set by Google, Facebook, et al.
Focusing too much local news site's advertising and tracking practices is missing the elephant in the room.
If local news is left to die, there will be little to no media oversight or local government. What happens in state legislatures is important, etc. If you require all these small organizations to have two competencies, you're going to get a lot more government corruption.
Local news organizations have always been required to maintain two competencies - advertising and journalism. This predates Google News, Google, and indeed the internet.
You're completely right about the absolutely critical importance of a free, open, and brave press. Yet it's possible that this particular business problem, the one you have so wisely and correctly pointed to, is not novel. Newspapers historically have found a variety of ways to fund their operations. I hope they can continue to exhibit the entrepreneurial spirit that helps keep a vibrant press free!
> Local news organizations have always been required to maintain two competencies - advertising and journalism. This predates Google News, Google, and indeed the internet.
3. Distribution.
News organisations like the music industry before them need to realize that a huge part of what people used to pay them for was the reliable distribution of their product. This and the markup on it was where they made their profits and now its gone.
> News organisations like the music industry before them need to realize that a huge part of what people used to pay them for was the reliable distribution of their product. This and the markup on it was where they made their profits and now its gone.
A viable, independent media is vital to a well-functioning democracy. I just realized that the implication decision behind of all this talk (about how the new media need to find a viable business model) is that our system of government shouldn't stand unless some of its vital organs are profitable in a dog-eat-dog capitalist system. Capitalism is given a higher priority than democracy.
> our system of government shouldn't stand unless some of its vital organs are profitable in a dog-eat-dog capitalist system
Plenty of countries get around this with independent but government funded media, the BBC in the UK, ABC in Australia, etc. I guess NPR is probably the closest thing in the US. They do a better job at reporting the news than most commercial providers and their sites are a lot less crapware infested (but getting worse), compare this (https://www.abc.net.au/news/) to just about any commercial news organisation.
The only problem I've ever had with the ABC is that it's crap at local news.
> Plenty of countries get around this with independent but government funded media
Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at. I don't recall the conversation advancing in that direction very often.
> The only problem I've ever had with the ABC is that it's crap at local news.
I honestly think local news is the main problem. I'm not super pessimistic about the NYT, the WSJ, or the Washington Post. They have the prestige and the reach to attract lots of subscribers and/or patrons, and they're big enough to invest heavily in technology. It's the small local and regional papers that worry me. The staff per eyeball to cover all their beats is probably a lot less favorable, and they don't have much prestige to draw on to attract other support.
> Capitalism is given a higher priority than democracy.
Given the American historical experience with politically aligned papers, I think we might be well-advised to consider the failure modes of state-owned media. To put it another way, we rely on capitalism to support democracy because the alternatives we've tried did not produce a vibrant, independent media. Instead, they produces one bound and beholden to our politics.
Have you ever wondered what the "Free" in "Detroit Free Press" referred to?
But, let's skip past that for the moment. Let's assume that infinite independence is possible. How does one go about having effective press at the required local level in a cost-effective way? Being cost-effective is pretty important for anything that might need to function without being profitable, after all.
Advertising is different from Javascript. Advertising can simply be a load of images that are easy to render, as in traditional periodicals.
Web pages suck because it's easier for a site to instruct the client to download and run analytics software from 3rd parties, instead of doing that work server side.
> Advertising is different from Javascript. Advertising can simply be a load of images that are easy to render, as in traditional periodicals. Web pages suck because it's easier for a site to instruct the client to download and run analytics software from 3rd parties, instead of doing that work server side.
My understanding is that one thing that Google, Facebook, and the internet as a whole have done is to make online advertising an incredibly high-volume, low-margin business. Trackerless banner ads pay almost nothing. Trackers push the margins up, but Google and Facebook suck up most of the air in that room.
But that's an effect, though maybe one that will create a vicious cycle. It's not the cause. The revenue rug was pulled out from under local news websites, and they're struggling to keep the lights on. Advertising and tracking are how everyone says you need to make money on the internet nowadays, and they're just following the example set by Google, Facebook, et al.
Focusing too much local news site's advertising and tracking practices is missing the elephant in the room.
If local news is left to die, there will be little to no media oversight or local government. What happens in state legislatures is important, etc. If you require all these small organizations to have two competencies, you're going to get a lot more government corruption.