It’s called browsing the internet. Don’t be mad when this goes extinct.The medium? You mean reading content on a screen? What’s the newest form?
It’s called browsing the internet. Don’t be mad when this goes extinct.
Tried it early on. I guess I'm not much of a magazine reader. I don't need the fluffy crap and hard "news" no longer exists, so what's the point (other than the publishers trying to make money for nothing)?
If any of the major news organizations would PUBLICLY PROMISE to report just the news and not opinion and click bait - I would pay $10 a month. Nobody from CNN to NBC to FOXNEWS (and most others) are reliable to get factual reporting anymore.
NOTE: Opinion pages are fine by the way - like they were once upon a time.
Note #2 - You will note that I am not being political as I slammed both sides of the news cycle above.
[automerge]1575061652[/automerge]
But - I just signed up for trial and put a not on my calendar to cancel at the end of Feb.
They are doing that for a reason: this is how subscriptions work. But here is cool to think about strange plots.So what if no one else is doing it that way. They are ALL doing it for one reason, Apple included.
Gotta push back on these generalizations a bit. To say that “hard news” doesn’t exist anymore is absurd.
You can’t square journalism with ad-driven TV entertainment. Most commentators at FOX are exactly that — they don’t even consider themselves journalists. CNN is driven by news cycle ad revenue and responding to the brilliant money-minting FOX outrage generator.
In fact, the state of journalism — despite despotic attacks on the freedom of the press and their integrity and well being (Kashoggi much?) across the globe — is stronger than ever. There are any number of quality outlets conducting deep journalism. Not hard to find. Don’t believe what the heads tell you about journalism being dead. That’s a lie.
Regardless, as others have pointed out, a majority of the content in Apple News is niche entertainment. It’s terribly misbranded.
And that is exactly what makes up at least 95% of both TV and print of the so-called media. It's all opinion. I myself began using the term "Infotainment" in 2007 before people began using it to describe todays mainstream media. Even when I watch Skynews, their daily Press Preview is also made of up individuals who are putting forth THEIR opinion from the side they support.Just as opinion or commentators should clearly identify themselves as entertainment as that makes up the bulk of cnn, Fox, etc.
at this point they could give away a 1 year trial & it wouldn't make any difference
There are still a few serious newspapers that do incredibly in-depth investigative journalism, but that kind of reporting costs a lot of money. You also have to keep in mind that you may not like the news they provide, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. For example, if you dislike the New York Times (the journalism part, not the opinion sections) then you might have to reconcile yourself to the fact that you don't like the reality they're reporting on.Where is this hard journalism hiding at? Lol. Journalists have no one to blame but themselves. The first time a blogger got confused with being a journalist should have scared them silly.
Journalists should be certified. Peer reviewed. Hold themselves to a higher standard. And that standard should be easily identified when reading an article. Just as cpas are. Cpa’s don’t do this for kicks. Having the public’s trust is vital.
Just as opinion or commentators should clearly identify themselves as entertainment as that makes up the bulk of cnn, Fox, etc.
There are still a few serious newspapers that do incredibly in-depth investigative journalism, but that kind of reporting costs a lot of money. You also have to keep in mind that you may not like the news they provide, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. For example, if you dislike the New York Times (the journalism part, not the opinion sections) then you might have to reconcile yourself to the fact that you don't like the reality they're reporting on.
There's no such thing as not having a political opinion nor "just reporting the facts". Everyone believes their own position is "neutral" and that it is everyone else that is biased. If you have the same world view as that person then you'll also consider them neutral but don't mistake that for lack of bias.I rarely hear or read an individual with the exception of Chris Hedges or Paul Craig Roberts who tries not to take a left or right issue. In fact Paul Craig Roberts has said on many occasions that he gets hatred from both sides of the aisle.