a funny thing about various loud substackers being so spiteful of the moneyed interests of "corporate media" is that—and, I like many 'stacks!—self-employed writers are much, much more exposed to the ruthless bottom-line logic of their biz than, like, a culture reporter at NPR
-
-
I’ve been seeing “bad Facebook coverage is happening because media competes with Facebook.” Lol. Top outlets are doing fine, and will likely do even better in a Facebook world. It will be symbiotic. Two, if journalists *could* be that strategic, the world would look different.
-
omg yes. this line of argument has driven me crazy
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's more that the selection effect that makes their work visible on social media is also coincidentally what drives their revenue, so people take the blinkered view of it they get on Twitter and attribute it to the company's motives rather than their own filters.
-
"All I see from x is ragebait." "Do you read x through anything other than viral screenshots on Twitter?" "Well, no."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Often it’s in their interest no to.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.