I think historically, government business was always pretty much relegated to private outlets prior to radio and TV. One needed to subscribe to a newspaper to know what was going on. With radio and television, we got the golden age of Edward R Murrow and Uncle Walter over the free but commercial airwaves.
And then we got cable and the 24 hour news cycle - thank you Ted Turner. ::insert sarcasm emoji here::
The biggest demise of MSM was corporate takeover of thousands of local news outlets. FCC relaxing rules on cross ownership allowed corporations to raid and close anything deemed "underperforming" - "local" media is no longer "local" - and eliminating the Fairness Doctrine gave them carte blanche to publish whatever lies they wanted - thank you, Rupert Murdoch.
I live in Oregon and read about Creutzfeldt-Jakob in The Oregonian on Saturday. One confirmed case and 2 presumptive. Hood River County is about 50 miles east of us. We have a paid subscription.
We also have paid subscriptions to The Guardian and the AP. I read Reuters and the BBC news each day and glance at CNN - most of which is behind paywalls, nowadays and I don't feel like giving them money.
We dropped 30 year subscriptions to the NY Times during the Biden Administration and an equally long WaPo subscription when Bezos started his editorial censorship. I don't miss either one. And BOTH of them have the financial means to "fight back". They CHOSE not to.
I also left Twitter when Elmo bought it. I had an account for years and had never posted and probably only opened it a handful of times. I didn't care for the platform then and I don't care for it now. It is irrelevant, to me.
Your column really did make it sound like we're all petulant children stomping our feet. People stop subscribing and/or paying for something when it no longer suits their needs. And the vast majority of corporate MSM definitely doesn't meet mine.
Historically, going back to the founding of the nation, information was actually posted in the town square where people could come a read it.
While agree with your assessment about the news outlets (DAMN YOU SINCLAIR) - the point I made (obviously not well enough) is that government information came from the government, initially in press releases that were telegraphed and later faxed to news outlets, later by email. Other information came from legitimate journalists going into the fields, like embedded with troops, or they asked questions at news conferences. Thus, the information published (and later broadcast) was verifiable and first-person.
I wasn't trying to make anyone out to be a petulant child. What concerns me is NOT people like you (or likely most of my readers) but the people to whom I talk who I don't really know -- they get their "news" from TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Telegraph - they NEVER read a newspaper, NEVER watch a TV news show, NEVER access a legitimate news feed on the internet (like AP, Reuters, etc.). NEVER.
As you know, I come from NYC. When I was a kid EVERYONE read a newspaper. And most everyone watched the evening news - a lot of that was, of course, because we all knew people fighting in Vietnam, and even though news was often delayed, it was as recent as we could get. Prior -- it was the radio.
One of the great sadnesses is the loss of local newspapers. They used to do investigative journalism, which they can no longer do the way they used to because the money just isn't there. Many stories ended up national news because of what local papers did. The model used to be that subscriptions were cheap, and advertising paid the freight. That was not just the Sunday circular ads, but job ads, housing ads, personal ads, announcements for weddings, funerals and the like. That's all gone now -- mostly because of the internet (and how much cheaper advertising is there) but also because lower readership led to lower ad rates, and down the drain it went. Now, subscriptions are expensive. Especially if you want a newspaper in print. Failed by technology once again. I LOVED reading the newspaper!
So you can talk all you want about needs no longer being met -- but there is a loss there.
Our little hamlet does one better than posting in the town square. We get a monthly printed newsletter/magazine mailed to every household every month. It has dates and times of meetings, agendas, information on infrastructure, how bond money is being spent, a letter from the Mayor, messages from our different supervisors, community events - you name it.
On the County and State levels we Voter Pamphlets with every ballot measure and candidate listed - with full documentation, pros and cons of measures, lists of individuals or groups who endorse...
Since all politics is local, it would behoove those who do not receive such information to demand that their representatives provide it.
The Oregon Health Authority has not deemed it necessary to issue any warnings or cautions about CJD, so I wouldn't necessarily expect the CDC to issue anything - and if it was on Twitter, I wouldn't believe it, anyway.
I totally get the sad demise of the local daily paper. I was a paperboy for The San Francisco News Call Bulletin, and then the afternoon Examiner and the Sunday combined Examiner/Chronicle during their actually illegal merger. Little kids delivering papers and collecting the money every month. It was great fun.
I get a digital copy of The Oregonian every day. They just went back to a broadsheet format and it's reading the daily paper without the stained fingers - the exact format of the printed paper. I remember buying a copy of the Sunday NY Times once in a while and marveling at all the shows, theatres, and things to do. San Francisco was such a backwater by comparison.
But the people who never do any of the things you listed aren't going to magically start reading a local newspaper - even if it were free. Nor are they going to start watching cable news outlets - or paying for online content.
My nieces and nephews don't read newspapers or watch MSNBC, et al. They're in their 30s and 40s. They're all politically savvy, though, getting their news online from various sources.
The digital age is upon us. Using social media is important, today. It's not going away. The issue, of course, is regulation - or the lack thereof. The owners have gotten too rich and too powerful. Businesses in general have gotten too rich and too powerful. Alas, this administration and this congress are not going to do anything about it - except maybe loosen it more.
I have an annoying habit of pulling out my phone to question things I'm being told or things I have read - not to prove myself right or someone else wrong - but to find out what is correct. I don't mind being wrong. I hate being wrong and having someone believe me.
The investigative reporters of the day are gone for good. They're being replaced by the TikTok'ers, the Substack content creators, the people who resigned or were fired from MSM who still have contacts everywhere. The New York Times will never publish The Pentagon Papers, again. The Washington Post will never publish Watergate, again. They have lost their ability to be objective and independent. They capitulated and no longer have the public trust.
I'm pushing 73. Things are never going to be the way they were when I was a kid, just as they changed from when my parents were kids. Instead of fighting for the way things were - even if they worked - we need to fight for the way we want them in the future.
And that means reining in Meta/Google/Twitter/Microsoft, et al to start. The Digital Age is here. We need to control it before it completely controls us.
I agree with EVERYTHING you said except one thing -- I find Twitter is a good source for LEADS -- I always track down local sources for the back-up facts. I don't trust Twitter either (except for those 15 second dog videos, and if they're fake, I don't want to know).
And it SUCKS that the Feds will use it as its only source for dissemination.
The vise keeps tightening and , coincidentally of course, helps to prop up a social media outlet owned by co-President Mushrat. Given that the latter lost a few bucks (100 billion here, a hundred billion there adds up to real money) at Tesla and was helping to downsize Twitter (now X), there may be myriad explanations for all this turmoil, none of which benefit the American consumer.
If you're a consumer, I think that some of the Substacks are really worth reading. But that's not source data. For example, to understand what is going on with various government departments, it's REPEATED on Substack - but someone has to go GET the data. You don't have to resubscribe. Did that make sense?
Yes, but I figure they’re getting that information from the source and Twitter so I don’t have to, but I understand newspapers and investigative outlets need to survive.
Thanks for this. Very insightful. I left x when he called Kamala a cunt. I'm notwon Bluesky and find it much more enjoyable. I am disturbed by the SS announcement being on there. I am equally pissed off that the orange moron communicates with us on Truth Social. I did join that one and cannot deactivate that account. Where will this all end?
I remember when it was considered bad form for a president to govern via twitter 4 years ago. It's amazing how our entire govt apparatus has been transformed to serve two insecure billionaires.
I think historically, government business was always pretty much relegated to private outlets prior to radio and TV. One needed to subscribe to a newspaper to know what was going on. With radio and television, we got the golden age of Edward R Murrow and Uncle Walter over the free but commercial airwaves.
And then we got cable and the 24 hour news cycle - thank you Ted Turner. ::insert sarcasm emoji here::
The biggest demise of MSM was corporate takeover of thousands of local news outlets. FCC relaxing rules on cross ownership allowed corporations to raid and close anything deemed "underperforming" - "local" media is no longer "local" - and eliminating the Fairness Doctrine gave them carte blanche to publish whatever lies they wanted - thank you, Rupert Murdoch.
I live in Oregon and read about Creutzfeldt-Jakob in The Oregonian on Saturday. One confirmed case and 2 presumptive. Hood River County is about 50 miles east of us. We have a paid subscription.
We also have paid subscriptions to The Guardian and the AP. I read Reuters and the BBC news each day and glance at CNN - most of which is behind paywalls, nowadays and I don't feel like giving them money.
We dropped 30 year subscriptions to the NY Times during the Biden Administration and an equally long WaPo subscription when Bezos started his editorial censorship. I don't miss either one. And BOTH of them have the financial means to "fight back". They CHOSE not to.
I also left Twitter when Elmo bought it. I had an account for years and had never posted and probably only opened it a handful of times. I didn't care for the platform then and I don't care for it now. It is irrelevant, to me.
Your column really did make it sound like we're all petulant children stomping our feet. People stop subscribing and/or paying for something when it no longer suits their needs. And the vast majority of corporate MSM definitely doesn't meet mine.
Historically, going back to the founding of the nation, information was actually posted in the town square where people could come a read it.
While agree with your assessment about the news outlets (DAMN YOU SINCLAIR) - the point I made (obviously not well enough) is that government information came from the government, initially in press releases that were telegraphed and later faxed to news outlets, later by email. Other information came from legitimate journalists going into the fields, like embedded with troops, or they asked questions at news conferences. Thus, the information published (and later broadcast) was verifiable and first-person.
As for Creutzfeldt-Jakob - 2 deaths as of today. https://www.empr.com/news/two-deaths-in-oregon-county-linked-to-fatal-brain-disorder/ -- and my point was that people OUTSIDE of Oregon with no access to the local press likely don't know about it.
I wasn't trying to make anyone out to be a petulant child. What concerns me is NOT people like you (or likely most of my readers) but the people to whom I talk who I don't really know -- they get their "news" from TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Telegraph - they NEVER read a newspaper, NEVER watch a TV news show, NEVER access a legitimate news feed on the internet (like AP, Reuters, etc.). NEVER.
As you know, I come from NYC. When I was a kid EVERYONE read a newspaper. And most everyone watched the evening news - a lot of that was, of course, because we all knew people fighting in Vietnam, and even though news was often delayed, it was as recent as we could get. Prior -- it was the radio.
One of the great sadnesses is the loss of local newspapers. They used to do investigative journalism, which they can no longer do the way they used to because the money just isn't there. Many stories ended up national news because of what local papers did. The model used to be that subscriptions were cheap, and advertising paid the freight. That was not just the Sunday circular ads, but job ads, housing ads, personal ads, announcements for weddings, funerals and the like. That's all gone now -- mostly because of the internet (and how much cheaper advertising is there) but also because lower readership led to lower ad rates, and down the drain it went. Now, subscriptions are expensive. Especially if you want a newspaper in print. Failed by technology once again. I LOVED reading the newspaper!
So you can talk all you want about needs no longer being met -- but there is a loss there.
Our little hamlet does one better than posting in the town square. We get a monthly printed newsletter/magazine mailed to every household every month. It has dates and times of meetings, agendas, information on infrastructure, how bond money is being spent, a letter from the Mayor, messages from our different supervisors, community events - you name it.
On the County and State levels we Voter Pamphlets with every ballot measure and candidate listed - with full documentation, pros and cons of measures, lists of individuals or groups who endorse...
Since all politics is local, it would behoove those who do not receive such information to demand that their representatives provide it.
The Oregon Health Authority has not deemed it necessary to issue any warnings or cautions about CJD, so I wouldn't necessarily expect the CDC to issue anything - and if it was on Twitter, I wouldn't believe it, anyway.
I totally get the sad demise of the local daily paper. I was a paperboy for The San Francisco News Call Bulletin, and then the afternoon Examiner and the Sunday combined Examiner/Chronicle during their actually illegal merger. Little kids delivering papers and collecting the money every month. It was great fun.
I get a digital copy of The Oregonian every day. They just went back to a broadsheet format and it's reading the daily paper without the stained fingers - the exact format of the printed paper. I remember buying a copy of the Sunday NY Times once in a while and marveling at all the shows, theatres, and things to do. San Francisco was such a backwater by comparison.
But the people who never do any of the things you listed aren't going to magically start reading a local newspaper - even if it were free. Nor are they going to start watching cable news outlets - or paying for online content.
My nieces and nephews don't read newspapers or watch MSNBC, et al. They're in their 30s and 40s. They're all politically savvy, though, getting their news online from various sources.
The digital age is upon us. Using social media is important, today. It's not going away. The issue, of course, is regulation - or the lack thereof. The owners have gotten too rich and too powerful. Businesses in general have gotten too rich and too powerful. Alas, this administration and this congress are not going to do anything about it - except maybe loosen it more.
I have an annoying habit of pulling out my phone to question things I'm being told or things I have read - not to prove myself right or someone else wrong - but to find out what is correct. I don't mind being wrong. I hate being wrong and having someone believe me.
The investigative reporters of the day are gone for good. They're being replaced by the TikTok'ers, the Substack content creators, the people who resigned or were fired from MSM who still have contacts everywhere. The New York Times will never publish The Pentagon Papers, again. The Washington Post will never publish Watergate, again. They have lost their ability to be objective and independent. They capitulated and no longer have the public trust.
I'm pushing 73. Things are never going to be the way they were when I was a kid, just as they changed from when my parents were kids. Instead of fighting for the way things were - even if they worked - we need to fight for the way we want them in the future.
And that means reining in Meta/Google/Twitter/Microsoft, et al to start. The Digital Age is here. We need to control it before it completely controls us.
I agree with EVERYTHING you said except one thing -- I find Twitter is a good source for LEADS -- I always track down local sources for the back-up facts. I don't trust Twitter either (except for those 15 second dog videos, and if they're fake, I don't want to know).
And it SUCKS that the Feds will use it as its only source for dissemination.
The vise keeps tightening and , coincidentally of course, helps to prop up a social media outlet owned by co-President Mushrat. Given that the latter lost a few bucks (100 billion here, a hundred billion there adds up to real money) at Tesla and was helping to downsize Twitter (now X), there may be myriad explanations for all this turmoil, none of which benefit the American consumer.
It's their plan, and it sucks. I plan to write as long as I can, until they deport me.
You don't think we can get what we need from all the Substack articles? I hate to resubscribe.
If you're a consumer, I think that some of the Substacks are really worth reading. But that's not source data. For example, to understand what is going on with various government departments, it's REPEATED on Substack - but someone has to go GET the data. You don't have to resubscribe. Did that make sense?
Yes, but I figure they’re getting that information from the source and Twitter so I don’t have to, but I understand newspapers and investigative outlets need to survive.
Thanks for this. Very insightful. I left x when he called Kamala a cunt. I'm notwon Bluesky and find it much more enjoyable. I am disturbed by the SS announcement being on there. I am equally pissed off that the orange moron communicates with us on Truth Social. I did join that one and cannot deactivate that account. Where will this all end?
It either ends with NO information being disseminated except through the government (like in Russia) - or we find a way to stop them!
I remember when it was considered bad form for a president to govern via twitter 4 years ago. It's amazing how our entire govt apparatus has been transformed to serve two insecure billionaires.
I share your sorrow.