Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot Asks: The Washington Post Says It Publishes Something Every Minute -- How Much Is Too Much? (washingtonian.com)
Media outlets are increasingly vying for your attention. But they are also feeding Google's algorithm. Some of them churn hundreds of news articles every day, hoping to offer a diverse range of articles to their readers, and also increase their "search space." The Washington Post is currently running a promotional offer -- letting people get a six-month digital subscription for $10 (pretty good if you ask me). But the Washington Post also mentions that is now publishes a new piece of content every minute. That's like 1,440 articles, videos and other forms of content in one single day. This raises a question: how much content is too much content? How many stories can a person possibly find time to read in a day? Do you feel that perhaps outlets should cut down on the number of things they publish? Or are you happy with the way things are?
The bad thing with that is even if you try to do the "right thing" by reading an internet newspaper, you end up in a filtering bubble by only looking up a couple categories you're interested in.
This makes an actual newspaper vastly superior. Even if you skim over or ignore swathes of it, all of the content is there and instantly available. Once in a while you might read something in the "useless" culural sections or among some content you usually don't give a damn about.
A newspaper is a collection of a few dozen reflective, zero power 4K displays that you can bend and fold at will, and where you don't even have to scroll. Scrolling is so 500 B.C.!
The shame is newspapers have shrunk and lowered in quality and merely echo propaganda like TV, radio and internet news sites do. Corporate power and advertisement make them trivially susceptible to pressure. I'm not sure that in my country there is any good daily newspaper left. E.g. war stories are the cartoon-like version where our authorities call for us to be outraged about the bombings of civilians by Russia and Syria, but starving people hit by artillery don't officially exist if they're not in the right areas. It's only a war crime when Syrians defend themselves, not when the West or Israel or Al Qaida does it.
Also, everyone is unemployed, underemployed or underpaid, and tobacco increased 2x in price, food increases despite the zero inflation. So they arbitrate between a newspaper and bread or a newspaper and smokes, and decline to buy the newspaper.
Internet news sites are the shit end of the stick, like video games replaced going outside and free or pirated movies replaced the theater.