Is the need for revenue on news organizations affecting journalism?
Possibly. Is this why we get so many ridiculous stories? Does Tiger Woods make the organizations money every time someone mentions him plus a scandal? Is this why meaningless stuff makes news? You’ve also got to deal with all the opinion/talk show hosts that get a hour or more to battle it out with someone who probably disagrees with them. Half the time they aren’t even really having a wise debate, they’re having a screaming match. People like this though, especially if the host is yelling about something they care about.
I just don’t see Fox getting rid of O’Reilly anytime soon and I think it’s pretty safe to say Glenn Beck is going nowhere. They have a loyal following. I’m guessing they make money because of this.
I think the need for revenue does affect journalism. It makes it harder to just tell the facts because, most people don’t want facts, they want a spin on some story to make it good or bad. They need that commentary. Drama makes for a good story. It also means that some stories get pushed under or ignored while the really meaningless things get bumped up. Other things were happening when Michael Jackson died, but you wouldn’t have known since every mainstream news organization in America was only showing things about him. Montage’s of his life and all the people mourning him.
Of course, the need/want of money is going to affect journalism. You make money by giving the masses what they want. It’s just how the whole scheme of things work.
