"The nexus between those who discover facts on the ground and those who bring this information to public notice must be maintained. If it is severed, then the system breaks." Would like to hear you expand on this. Seems right to me, though I'm quite sure if I can explain why. But also, isn't the nexus already, irredeemably broken? Distribution has been trumping content ever since social media was invented, even though, as far as news is concerned, social doesn't seem to care anymore. But even the deals between various media outlets and OpenAI suggests the nexus is broken, doesn't it?
Hey Tim - yes, you're right. It's severed and one half is writhing around on the ground in a macabre spectacle. I think actually that the breaking of the nexus is maybe the key problem. The people who benefit from the attention aren't the ones doing the content work.
I wonder if with social media now rejecting news and moating their sites so you can't even share links in a meaningful way, there is an opportunity for legacy media to reconnect? I think audiences are desperate for "good journalism" and would welcome not just "news" but a helpful way through the onslaught of information. Maybe the sort of interface you describe is a way forward, though I suspect legacy media will fuck it up as completely as they did the original move to digitisation.. Something like Substack is also trying to reconnect content with distribution to the benefit of content creators. A legacy outfit that somehow opened themselves to platforming or amplifying the sort of work that is now being created in newsletters would be welcomed, I think, and would further bridge the gap. I doubt Nine, let alone News, will ever do that, but someone like Crikey could. Ground News is another model that is sort of in this area. Maybe all is not lost! (Might write something on this.)
"The nexus between those who discover facts on the ground and those who bring this information to public notice must be maintained. If it is severed, then the system breaks." Would like to hear you expand on this. Seems right to me, though I'm quite sure if I can explain why. But also, isn't the nexus already, irredeemably broken? Distribution has been trumping content ever since social media was invented, even though, as far as news is concerned, social doesn't seem to care anymore. But even the deals between various media outlets and OpenAI suggests the nexus is broken, doesn't it?
Hey Tim - yes, you're right. It's severed and one half is writhing around on the ground in a macabre spectacle. I think actually that the breaking of the nexus is maybe the key problem. The people who benefit from the attention aren't the ones doing the content work.
I wonder if with social media now rejecting news and moating their sites so you can't even share links in a meaningful way, there is an opportunity for legacy media to reconnect? I think audiences are desperate for "good journalism" and would welcome not just "news" but a helpful way through the onslaught of information. Maybe the sort of interface you describe is a way forward, though I suspect legacy media will fuck it up as completely as they did the original move to digitisation.. Something like Substack is also trying to reconnect content with distribution to the benefit of content creators. A legacy outfit that somehow opened themselves to platforming or amplifying the sort of work that is now being created in newsletters would be welcomed, I think, and would further bridge the gap. I doubt Nine, let alone News, will ever do that, but someone like Crikey could. Ground News is another model that is sort of in this area. Maybe all is not lost! (Might write something on this.)