Is everyone just using AI and not proof reading? I see this a lot lately. Even Tom’s Guide has bad editing, a good example is this article: https://www.tomsguide.com/news/pixel-8

Most notably, the display looks set to shrink from 6.3 inches to 5.8 inches

Then

The Pixel 8’s screen is rumored to measure 6.17 inches, down from 6.31 inches.

It’s like they’re just grabbing from other articles and cramming together or adding content to old news now vs analyzing and forming opinions. With all the LMG drama lately, I had hoped written news would take note. Maybe I’m just too picky.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whenever I see people complaining about the quality of journalism I wonder how many of them pay for their news. Journalism isn’t free, if they don’t get funding from readers then they need to cut costs or get funding from companies and then it becomes tricky to talk against said companies.

        • r00ty@kbin.life
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This decline started long before 2017, but that’s not even what we’re discussing. If funding is being cut, all that does is shift some of the blame.

          But who was at fault wasn’t the topic of discussion. The fact is standards are dropping and it’s noticeable.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, I mentioned “since 2010”, I gave some numbers I could find without wasting the time to find all cuts since 2010.

            That’s exactly what we’re discussing, media budgets going down affects the quality of the work the employees can do and the quality and quantity of employees they can hire.

            Radio-Canada used to have their own journalists everywhere in the world, now they have a couple here and there and resort to using contractors when required, why? Their budget got dilapidated.

            All medias use articles from the Associated Press more and more because it’s cheaper than having their own journalists.

            Cost cutting measures are taken all over the place. Add the fact that people don’t read the articles anymore because they barely spend enough time on the page to read the title (if they don’t just check it from the Google result of from their Facebook feed), the fact that people turn to “alternative journalists” who don’t have any ethics code or quality standards plus the people who don’t read at all and just check YouTube videos instead… The only way to get their attention isn’t with facts but with sensationalism and the only way to increase their budget is by getting clicks and that happens by catching people’s attention, not by reporting facts and not by releasing few high quality articles late after the fact. Readers want the news now, as it happens, no time for fact checks or corrections!

            No wonder there’s a media crisis that affects all serious medias, the way they traditionally did there job would lead to their death today.

            • r00ty@kbin.life
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No wonder there’s a media crisis that affects all serious medias, the way they traditionally did there job would lead to their death today.

              This we can agree on. But the point isn’t so much why, I can’t do much more than pay what I always did for the BBC. It’s more just the annoyance that what used to be a great institution (some will argue) has been run into the ground this way.

              It’s probably the same with the degradation of most services now. The race to the bottom is the result of the average person always buying the cheapest option.

              The full service airlines for short haul are mostly now offering the same services as low cost for example.

              It’s a strange time we live in, at least from my point of view.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well for media funded by the state we at least have the power to vote for parties that don’t want to defund them, so that’s that. For private media, well, they’ll always thrive to make more profit so yeah, race to the bottom 🤷