анонимный вопрос
Briefly about the problem for those who are too lazy to read the wall of text on LiveJournal:
Journalism is dying; it is a global trend related to the fact that the media have lost their monopoly on the distribution of information. On one hand, bloggers and search engines have killed news agencies. On the other hand, quality investigations and fact-checking have ceased to be profitable. There is less and less money from readers in the industry; as a result, the media are becoming servants of sponsors, and this completely undermines trust in them, especially if the media hide their sponsors from readers. How to solve this problem in a society where there are states regulating the industry is unknown. The question is, can the problem be solved in a stateless society, or will the abolition of regulations no longer help here.
For some reason, it seems to me that in a stateless society, the intensity of the problem itself will decrease. Modern media are losing trust because they write about politics, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to write about it impartially: the reader is politicized, the sponsor is politicized, and if you write ambivalently, you’ll be torn apart from both sides. But in the absence of a state, there is also no hysteria about who is in power, how the looted resources are shared, who is stealing from the common fund, and all that.
Of course, in the absence of a political agenda, there will still be issues of business reputation, disputes about the ethics of certain marketing moves, and so on. You can’t unring the bell, and the world will not return to old models of journalism, so after some time we will consume information in ways and in forms that we couldn’t have imagined recently. And then a new method will come into fashion, and so on indefinitely. Nevertheless, the essence will remain the same: the struggle for attention. Some will convert attention into money, some into fame. Some will work for their own money as a hobby, and some will slog along on sponsorships.
Will old-fashioned quality news content with fact-checking remain in commercial quantities? No, fact-checking is the reader’s personal business, and usually, they just don’t care whether the news is real or from the “Panorama” news agency — they read it, laugh, and switch to something else.
Will journalistic investigations remain? It’s unlikely they will be journalistic. Rather, it will be something like “a company found (or invented) compromising material on a competitor and leaks it through influencers” or “read reviews of new market products.”
Is it a good thing when everyone can receive information from many different sources, and you cannot be sure of any of them? This is much better than receiving information from a single source, believing it, and finding out ten years later that you were lied to.
