Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> It's hard to tell if the media has gotten worse at their jobs

It's not that "the media" has gotten worse at their jobs. Rather, there simply a lot less funding for reporters. The hit in funding has become much worse in local reporting -- especially local newspapers. However, if this is viewed as a training ground for the few large national/international news organizations, it's easy to see how this has a profound impact for even the large and well funded publications.

There's simply much less reporting happening than their used to be, and it's a real problem.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/07/13/u-s-newsroo...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/626459/number-employees-....



> a lot less funding for reporters

There's plenty of funding for and to reporters who aren't trying to discover the truth but instead manufacture it.


Apparently SBF had ‘donated’ millions to ProPublica to cover effective altruism. These institutions are so desperate for funding that they’re having to get creative just to survive. I’m not sure what’s worse, no media or one that pretends to be neutral but is actually in the pockets of private donors.


I don't know if this is right or wrong, but if I were running a news agency, I would think that glowing puff pieces would be one of the first things I'd eliminate in the event of a financial crunch.

Is there a reason we think they persist?


Puff pieces are part of the PR machine. From what little I know of it, they’re basically ghostwritten by PR agencies so they cost almost nothing in the way of journalists to produce. Also, there is the quid pro quo aspect where puff pieces are (presumably) traded for things like access and other newsworthy information


Why? Glowing puff pieces are a reliable, dirt cheap source of revenue


The first statistic you link is a newsroom statistic. This cut makes sense, because newspaper now get their news from big agencies.

Newsrooms are completely different from investigative digging into stuff.


But who collects the stories for the agencies - it used to be the local reporters who are the ones gone. This is the point of the statistic

I am in UK and look at my local papers - the number of stories is massively down and the report numbers are much smaller. One reporter now for several London boroughs when there used to be several for one.

Who is looking at local government now?


No one, and (though I'm not sure this is true in the UK as well, though I imagine it is) it's pretty much 100% private equity's fault. They bought up every local paper they could, saddled them with the debt (how that's a thing that's allowed in accounting I will never understand), and then claimed the Internet killed them.

Yes, news orgs could have adapted faster, but most privately held papers were in the black. Only when the debts and insane growth expectations were added were they dying.

Private equity is ruining modern democratic institutions.


Agreed about privat equity in general but the UK papers are all owned by media groups I think so no PEs fault here.

The issue is lack of advertising revenue. No local classified adds or local firms. All gone to Facebook.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: