A media property is somewhere inbetween a product company like Apple, and a political entity like a nation. It packages/curates news and opinion with an aesthetic. The reality distortion field of say Apple only needs to project auteur aesthetic over the design of objects.
-
-
Yes, Prime Minister captured this old media environment perfectly. One newspaper/one reality. In fact things were so degenerate, you could have multiple newspapers/magazines clustering in a single reality, so inhabits could claim to read *gasp* MORE than one perspective.pic.twitter.com/JDOHM5YErh
Show this thread -
This is no longer possible. We are in a HIGHLY non-degenerate regime of news expectations because news discussion leaders in the audience (that’s us here on twitter) routinely see 6 impossibly different perspectives on a single screen before breakfast.
Show this thread -
The only tractable way to serve this kind of audience at scale is to “carve the audience expectations at the joints” so to speak, and basically Pick a Tribe, Know Your Tribe, Create Reality for Tribe. PaT/KYT/CRfT. Then run editorial like you’re an elected rep. What kind of rep?
Show this thread -
This is where it gets interesting and subtle. Here’s what has happened. The crowd has gerrymandered the editorial ranks! Legendary editors typically create a public via auteur editorial vision. This has been reversed. Crowds now create editors.https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Intellectuals-Create-a/234984 …
Show this thread -
When politics is healthy, voters pick politicians. When politics is gerrymandered, politicians pick voters. When media is healthy, editors create audiences. When media is gerrymandered, audiences pick editors. (Maybe we should call the latter tribal reverse-gerrymandering)
Show this thread -
You can’t resist this. You see what happens when you try: the NYT looks increasingly schizophrenic, trying to run a hybrid of an auteur-editorial and tribal mirror platform. Well you can, below a certain scale. Consider the blogosphere
Show this thread -
It is no accident that the sub-critical blogosphere (ie below audience-mass needed for ad-based models) has not one but TWO key institutional forms. The blog itself, and the aggregator/discussion forum. They represent, respectively, the auteur-editorial and tribal mirror forms.
Show this thread -
This is by the way the reason (subconscious) I’ve never tried to build and attach a true discussion forum to ribbonfarm. It would be a hybrid mess. You can choose to project an auteur reality distortion field, or you can serve as a tribal mirror. Not both.
Show this thread -
If you try to do both, you introduce centripetal forces that pull the property apart. This may not be a bad thing. It is what happened to Less Wrong in a positive way. That started as an auteur blog, morphed into a tribal mirror, then exploded into a little universe of properties
Show this thread -
The only thing that can keep a property together despite such growing centripetal forces? Money? If ad revenues continue collapsing as they are for many properties (not all), property either dies or explodes into the smaller survivable bits.
Show this thread -
The big takeaway from this whole evolutionary trajectory is that the civic function traditionally served by the media, ground-truthing and as a check-and-balance to government, has permanently shifted to the open aggregator/distributor channels.
Show this thread -
The media can no longer serve both functions it once did: create cultural reality bubbles (“and that’s the way it is”) AND ground-truth politics. The industry has chosen to specialize in former function and leave latter to basically open-source efforts on distribution channels.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.