A market for truth?
Do you want the good news or the bad news? The real or the fake news? Or the fake news mascerading as the real? I had been curious about the news business until I spent time with people like Upendra and Jeff Jarvis almost 2 years ago trying to understand how we might look at the various aspects of news coverage – “perspectives” was a word we used alot. Then I became a lot more interested. Or maybe the better word is conscious.
In some cases, its clear there are perspectives or lots of room for interpretation. But who decides what is important? Or what is true? The Economist takes a look at media bias from the market perspective arguing that it is in fact just healthy competition. The gist is the Rupert should not be to blame for the views on Fox. He is in fact just great businessman for giving people what they want – not truth, but confirmation of their biases and beliefs. The reward? A great business – a large audience which begets subscribers and advertisers.
So at what point does journalism cease to exist? If I am a lawyer and I give my clients what they want or an accountant for that matter, at what point do the wants of legal and tax dodges run up against ethics? I dont know, but I am pretty sure Fox News cant really be called news anymore – entertainment yes, bias amplification yes, reassurance to the right yes. But news? I dont know – the Daily show probably has more news.
Each time I look at the way Daylife evolves, I am struck by the contrast of sources and perspectives on each topic. Looking at Obama coverage, for example, is particularly interesing, running through a broad range of perspectives and bumping up against the non-news at the edges. Perspectives are still a good idea, even if we dont agree on “the truth”. And as things progress rather than merely talking about deviations from the truth, we can actually measure it, as Daylife is beginning to show with their analysis of what sources and journalists tend to cover particular subjects.
Maybe once you can tell what the bias is, it matter much less what it is, just that the truth lies somewhere in the continuum of perspectives. At least its out there.
Oh yes. I’m still waiting for the truthiness API call in the DayPI.
Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged: daylife, Economist, News Business | 2 Comments
2 Comments to “A market for truth?”
Nice, thoughtful post.
Take 1:
My daughter, 7, was telling me yesterday that she believed Obama would win. “Look around Papa!” – she would add. There were Obama campaign ads everwhere around Palo Alto. Well, a great teaching moment I thought. Her comment made my mind flash back to the 2004 referendum elections in Venezuela. Endless lines of voters against the reelection of the president voted that day around our neighborhood. The neighbors were convinced of the results until the reports came up at the end of the day – well, the end of the night really. Trust over the electoral system aside, our perspective of “the truth” was so partial that did not add up enough to be “the dominant”perspective. Funny enough, a neighbor was just arriving from Pennsylvania yesterday impressed by the presence of the McCain campaign around her hometown in rural PA. Tomorrow we will see which perspective is the dominant perspective.
Take 2:
Have you seen the movie vantagepoint? See the preview here: http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/vantagepoint/ Worth your while!
What if you had a news experience that could emulate this? Collect the points of view (perspectives) of every user profile type around a particular event or story and create a “perspective dial” or “truth dial” on “perspectivized stories”.
Cheers,
Jose
Perspective is valuable just because it shows another view and this is something Daylife is pulling off on its topic pages – there is plenty for and against on the Obama page. Between mainstream sources and blogs you get quite a bit of breadth.
Will have to check out Vantagepoint.