In the 1930s, there were two primary news sources:  radio and the newspaper.  They sent their correspondents around the world to gather news.  These journalists would see and hear, verify and corroborate, investigate, and then expertly and objectively file their reports. The reader (or listener) would know that an editor provided oversight, and the publication (or radio station) stood behind the report.

When television came around in the 1950s, this model still worked.  70+ years later, media has evolved significantly, and so has “reporting.” Consider:

• The cost of reporting has meant that newspapers have significantly reduced the number of reporters in the field.  This has been exacerbated by declining ad revenues.
• Many “news” shows are now run by the entertainment divisions of the networks: sensationalism and ratings now trumps the “public good” of the news.
• The line between being a reporter (objective/independent) and being a columnist (who is expected to have a strong opinion) is often blurred.
• The 1000 channel universe on the cable dial means that news is available literally around the clock, from dozens of news networks.
• The billion-channel universe – the internet – has meant that consumers can consume  any “news”, from any outlet, from anywhere in the world.  The scope of choice has expanded, and also the locus of control: the user self-selects what they wish to consume.  And many of the news outlets are controlled by people looking to influence the news consumer to their views: bad actors, country propagandists, and fringe groups.

Probably the biggest change has been the impact of the social web – sometimes called citizen journalism.

• Bloggers – often with huge followings – provide a narrowcast view into their area of focus.
• Twitter provides an instant on-the-ground perspective – directly from people who are there.
• YouTube provides graphic footage on news – often as it is happening.
• Facebook provides perspective from people… who are just like you
• Google News and Apple News curates content – sometimes without any human oversight.

In a certain sense, the internet is squeezing out traditional journalism.  Something is gained, but something is also being lost.  No guarantee of accuracy.  No editing.  No guarantee of independence.  No oversight.  While it is true that the wisdom of the crowd will expose the most egregious errors (and bias), there is no guarantee that what is being read is reporting, or merely opinion masquerading as reporting, or even propaganda pretending to be reporting.

As a result, consumers – and marketers – are easily trapped in their own echo chamber.  They learn what they want to learn, from people they want to learn from. They don’t listen to the “other”, and they feed themselves data that is incorrect, biased, or corrupt.  They don’t get exposed to the diversity of thinking and perspective that will allow them to make their best decisions.

Does this topic resonate? Reach out to Randall: he can present it to your group.  (More presentation topics)
Download Randall’s professional credentials: Speaker credentials one-sheet or Management Advisory credentials.

Content Authenticity Statement: 100% original content: no AI was used in creating this content.

@RandallCraig (Follow me for daily insights)
www.RandallCraig.com: Professional credentials site.