Understanding Fake News (from an Indie-Media-Perspective)

Gutes Video von Tim Pool (Youtube, Twitter, Patreon, Ex-Vice, Ex-Fusion), ein Erklärungsversuch von Fake News und hyperpartisan Websites aus Perspektive eines Indie-Medienmachers. Das meiste unterschreibe ich so.

The content that works online is hyperpartisan. And that means, young people who fit the mold, who believe in partisan content, to play to one side or the other, are going to get clicks. They're going to generate ad revenue, they're going to attract investors and the biggest media startups are going to be inherently one side or the other. And this is bad for everybody.

Because now we're seeing violence in the streets, we're seeing insane rhetoric between the left and the right and the problems in my opinion are only gonna get worse. My advice is to read, watch, listen to everything you can. […]

Many people have asked me: Have I ever been directed to produce content to fit a political ideology? And the answer is: Yes. […] Unfortunately I found that it's no longer the role of media to challenge preconceptions, to challenge the narrative. It's the goal of media to find people who'll click the link more than anyone else, so they can make money.

In dem Kontext ebenfalls dazu lesen: Eine neue Studie stellt fest, dass sich die politischen Haltungen älterer Menschen in Amerika, die weniger Social Media nutzen, schneller polarisieren, als die von jungen Menschen. Die Forscher haben dafür zwei Erklärungsansätze: „One is stuff that has nothing to do with media at all but is structural, like increasing income inequality. The second is non-digital media, and cable TV and talk radio in particular.“

Ich könnte mir nun vorstellen, dass ältere Menschen sich deshalb schneller polarisieren, da das (in den USA ohnehin schon immer mehr als scharfzüngige) Talk Radio auf die aufgeheizte Stimmung im Netz als Konkurrenz mit noch krasseren Shows reagierten. So kann man die „schnellere Polarisation der Alten“ zumindest teilweise als gesellschaftlichen Effekt lesen, als eine aufmerksamkeitsökonomische Reaktion des Medienmarkts auf Entwicklungen im Netz. Das ist aber natürlich reine Spekulation, ich verfolge Talk Radio nicht und weiß nicht, ob die noch schriller wurden in den letzten Jahren, in denen die Polarisation bei älteren Menschen zunahm. (Und die Daten der Wissenschaftler reichen leider nur bis 2012.)

Vox.com: Something is breaking American politics, but it's not social media

More than a third of talk radio listeners are over age 65, and half of Fox News’s audience is over age 68. As bad as getting your news from Facebook can be, it’s often far better than relying on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh.

The authors’ data only goes until 2012, so it can’t tell us much about the 2016 election. But even though Trump’s use of Twitter was remarkable, my guess is the main way it mattered was by setting the agenda for more traditional news outlets, particularly cable news and talk radio. Remember, it was seniors — only 6 percent of whom use Twitter — who pushed Trump to the White House. He won 53 percent of voters ages 65 and over, but only 37 percent of voters ages 29 and younger. Trump is the Twitter-using president, not the president chosen by Twitter’s users.