i would imagine it's likely that concerns over who actually decides on what constitutes as such have existed ever since someone decided it was a good idea to record (and present) details of recent events and current affairs. or who controls the news is often behind what news we receive, look you see. many, many fine works, be it novels, plays, films or general articles, have been presented about this very concern. there is no way i can compete with such, but all the same i can observe such.
once - and this is kind of relevant even today - it was so that newspaper owners were considered all powerful, for their reporting could very much make or break anyone. celebrities, certainly, but mostly the concern has always been in regards of doing so with politicians. power, wealth and money were usually what swayed such thinking. here in the UK, it is so that the overwhelming number of such proprietors tend to favour a certain political party over another based entirely on how little they will get taxed off them.
yet these press owners today face a whole new threat. however you word it, the answer is of the same result for them - fewer people buy newspapers, more and more people get their news off of that internet thing, online. so a priority is to make sure your publication gets more and more "hits" or visits on the net, or your level of power shrinks (diminishes). and that means bowing to the internet overlord.
quite by chance i happened to be on the webpage of a certain newspaper website as this boo boo appeared. it was quickly taken down, of course, but i managed to do one of them "screen grab" things. pretty sure you can work it out for yourself, but clearly an exchange of what the current state of play was in terms of Google rankings was copied and pasted into a headline. basically, or essentially, a real time, live insight into just how much effort goes in to making sure all stories appearing connect or pertain to ranking on search results.
a reasonably (or quite) superficial take on this incident may well be does it really matter how they determine to do a story on events leading up to a high profile game of football. yes, of course it does. if they are putting that much weight, or importance, on how this story ranks on the world's most used search engine, then surely such dictates all stories.
should you wonder why one gets bombarded with stories on a particular subject - a television presenter resigning in some disgrace, for instance, or a casual royal assuming his belief in something happening counts as actual evidence - there you are. people in large numbers are, for whatever reason, searching for information on the subject, the newspapers see what people are searching for, they create content, which used to be journalistic articles, to meet the search criteria.
there is, of course, absolutely no way of fighting or reversing this. circle the wagons, indeed. my curiosity, if it can be called such, i what will come next to shape how and why we get the news we do.
be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment