What if there is literally no profitable model for digital news? Or none that actually scales and endures without, say, the established readership base and brand of the NYT. This seems...increasingly likely to me?
-
-
This solution, taken to its logical extreme, is no less flawed (and much more dangerous) than the current news structure.
-
More dangerous than Fox News? Doubt it.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
You would put the Trump Administration in charge of dispensing money for news providers?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
NPR is partially state funded, and it’s certainly constantly under threat by republicans, but it’s a good model to start with. Definitely not beholden to any party despite being tarred as “liberal”
Keskustelun loppu
-
-
-
what your proposing sounds like government propaganda. State news.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
With all due respect - if all news was indeed taxpayer funded wouldn’t there be a concern that it becomes politically aligned to the ruling party as opposed to being independent?
-
Countless European broadcasters are state-funded, and they are not beholden in any way to a ruling party. Someone mentioned in this thread that NPR is publicly funded, and it’s editorial line is independent. The US has to stop thinking that government funded equals corruption.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
I think I agree. My British friends totally trust BBC. Canadians trust CBC. NPR is not in that league. Would be federal money better spent than on a juvenile wall.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
What news agency is going to criticize or condemn the people who write their checks?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.