You see VICE goes bankrupt, the BBC is under pressure can you see a similarity between both? I might be mentally unstable but even I know the reporting about this forum does not have a correlation even more no causation to the demise of media companies. I think the NYT is flourishing and personally if I were American I would probably watch a lot of PBS. However the last remark is pure speculation I don't know PBS enough maybe they are too centristic. In case that Trump gets elected the revenue of the media would go through the roof anyway.
I am subscriber of two outlets. I am a news addict and waste dozens of hours listening to articles. I am no expert on international news outlets but from what I heard I would never subscribe to VICE. Some of my concerns about VICE are shown in the reporting about this forum - however in this instance I am heavily biased so I will talk about my problems with the reporting style of VICE in general.
The reporting style of VICE is known as gonzo-style meaning that it involves the reporter as a participant in the story rather than an objective observer. They use very often informal language in order to be "trendy" and attractive for a young audicence. I have a huge problem with that. I perceive their attempt to gain popularity of the younger generation as needy, desperate and embarrassing. Cringe as the young people would say nowadays.
Moreover I think they suffer from audience capture. The following sums it up: Audience capture is a self-reinforcing feedback loop that involves telling one's audience what they want to hear and getting rewarded for it. VICE is by far not the only outlet that is influenced by that. I follow independent media and due to the fact they finance themselves on a grass-root level they are affected by it a lot.
However this is not my main criticism. I really hate as many others too strong emotionalization and hypermoralization of stories. Ironically I might suffer from the last point myself. I think many media outlets tend to hypermoralization. And due to the fact this pattern is adapted by myself I become an hypocrite myself. Maybe that is an exaggeration but it sounds cool and why not no one is paying me for these 1 million threads if you want to read good and coherent stories subscribe to an outlet that delivers texts without endless rambling and self-hatred. So where was I?
The over-emotionalization. In German there is the term borderline journalism but I think the word does not capture my perception perfectly. I think VICE did some stories which crossed lines in order to get the attention they wanted. Sometimes the content was disturbing and kind of edgy. They reported about extreme issues very explicitly. Personally I perceive that sensationalistic and cheap. I think some of their titles use clickbait. And I really hate such a behavior. I read they photoshopped smileys on the face of genocide victims. This is really horrible and there is not really a good excuse for that.
I prefer a news outlet with clear ethical standards. But this becomes very double-edged. Due to the fact one can perceive stories and headlines differently. The danger is that one only reads outlets which write what you want to hear. So you should not be too sensitive for comments you dislike.
I dislike emotionalization of stories. I have the feeling media companies chase the topic that sells the best currently like for example Andrew Tate or the psychotic episode of Kanye West. Though the real consequences are often not followed because the topic is outdated then. This is why we read too often about problems but never see a solution for them. I have the feeling also in my country that journalism is very paternalistic. They were the goatkeeper of debates which had advantages but they see how their power vanishes more and more. It is getting pretty hard to make money with journalism and the need for money can lead pretty quickly to corruption. I think the situation in the US is even more screwed compared to the German media landscape. I have the feeling sometimes the media tries to lecture the readers too much and the people dislike being treated like a child. Personally I have a huge issue with how the German media reports on assisted suicide. They distort the highest court ruling and are very onsesided in the way they report about it. Moreover the German people want to have liberal assisted suicide laws but due to the fact the whole media bubble only reports one narrative the people are not represented.
I hear the last argument from many people in my country. I am more satisfied than them on the diversity of opinions. Though it is a fact many people don't feel represented anymore by media outlets. Maybe fake news are a reason for that - or maybe it is true that the spectrum of allowed opinions becomes more and more narrow.
I hate the dramatization of stories they do it because they will get the most likes and clicks for that on social media. I think this might lead to shortterm profits but has no future on a longtime basis. Social media, the internet and globalisation have made our interconnected news system extremely fast. Sometimes the profound analysis of topics has suffered a lot due to that. There was a time I only read the free articles of newspapers. And they suck so much. The texts are extremely superficial and barely contain any value. It is clear the people are sick of that. So they turn for example to populistic (but eloquent) bullshitters on suicide forums who shit their half-knowledge on a daily basis for free on the internet.
I think I could go on for quite a time but I think noone will read it anyway. I think the thread would have had a potenital to talk more about the reporting of suicide related topics on the media. But I think that such an expressed schadenfreude for the demise of VICE would have had necessarily backfired on my person. I am full of misery and resentment already way too much there is no need to prove this even further.
I am subscriber of two outlets. I am a news addict and waste dozens of hours listening to articles. I am no expert on international news outlets but from what I heard I would never subscribe to VICE. Some of my concerns about VICE are shown in the reporting about this forum - however in this instance I am heavily biased so I will talk about my problems with the reporting style of VICE in general.
The reporting style of VICE is known as gonzo-style meaning that it involves the reporter as a participant in the story rather than an objective observer. They use very often informal language in order to be "trendy" and attractive for a young audicence. I have a huge problem with that. I perceive their attempt to gain popularity of the younger generation as needy, desperate and embarrassing. Cringe as the young people would say nowadays.
Moreover I think they suffer from audience capture. The following sums it up: Audience capture is a self-reinforcing feedback loop that involves telling one's audience what they want to hear and getting rewarded for it. VICE is by far not the only outlet that is influenced by that. I follow independent media and due to the fact they finance themselves on a grass-root level they are affected by it a lot.
However this is not my main criticism. I really hate as many others too strong emotionalization and hypermoralization of stories. Ironically I might suffer from the last point myself. I think many media outlets tend to hypermoralization. And due to the fact this pattern is adapted by myself I become an hypocrite myself. Maybe that is an exaggeration but it sounds cool and why not no one is paying me for these 1 million threads if you want to read good and coherent stories subscribe to an outlet that delivers texts without endless rambling and self-hatred. So where was I?
The over-emotionalization. In German there is the term borderline journalism but I think the word does not capture my perception perfectly. I think VICE did some stories which crossed lines in order to get the attention they wanted. Sometimes the content was disturbing and kind of edgy. They reported about extreme issues very explicitly. Personally I perceive that sensationalistic and cheap. I think some of their titles use clickbait. And I really hate such a behavior. I read they photoshopped smileys on the face of genocide victims. This is really horrible and there is not really a good excuse for that.
I prefer a news outlet with clear ethical standards. But this becomes very double-edged. Due to the fact one can perceive stories and headlines differently. The danger is that one only reads outlets which write what you want to hear. So you should not be too sensitive for comments you dislike.
I dislike emotionalization of stories. I have the feeling media companies chase the topic that sells the best currently like for example Andrew Tate or the psychotic episode of Kanye West. Though the real consequences are often not followed because the topic is outdated then. This is why we read too often about problems but never see a solution for them. I have the feeling also in my country that journalism is very paternalistic. They were the goatkeeper of debates which had advantages but they see how their power vanishes more and more. It is getting pretty hard to make money with journalism and the need for money can lead pretty quickly to corruption. I think the situation in the US is even more screwed compared to the German media landscape. I have the feeling sometimes the media tries to lecture the readers too much and the people dislike being treated like a child. Personally I have a huge issue with how the German media reports on assisted suicide. They distort the highest court ruling and are very onsesided in the way they report about it. Moreover the German people want to have liberal assisted suicide laws but due to the fact the whole media bubble only reports one narrative the people are not represented.
I hear the last argument from many people in my country. I am more satisfied than them on the diversity of opinions. Though it is a fact many people don't feel represented anymore by media outlets. Maybe fake news are a reason for that - or maybe it is true that the spectrum of allowed opinions becomes more and more narrow.
I hate the dramatization of stories they do it because they will get the most likes and clicks for that on social media. I think this might lead to shortterm profits but has no future on a longtime basis. Social media, the internet and globalisation have made our interconnected news system extremely fast. Sometimes the profound analysis of topics has suffered a lot due to that. There was a time I only read the free articles of newspapers. And they suck so much. The texts are extremely superficial and barely contain any value. It is clear the people are sick of that. So they turn for example to populistic (but eloquent) bullshitters on suicide forums who shit their half-knowledge on a daily basis for free on the internet.
I think I could go on for quite a time but I think noone will read it anyway. I think the thread would have had a potenital to talk more about the reporting of suicide related topics on the media. But I think that such an expressed schadenfreude for the demise of VICE would have had necessarily backfired on my person. I am full of misery and resentment already way too much there is no need to prove this even further.
Last edited:
