Right now, 50%-70% percent of traditional news is an article that paraphrase what a source links says.

Simply pointing me to the source link is more than enough for me to get the info.

The weirdest type of articles, are those that announce new products, The product is not available yet, so what does news websites do is that they paraphrase the press release. Matter of fact, a lot of times you would go to the product page only to find that they used a news service to publish their press release (I see it happen most of the times on TechCrunch)

I think I clarified my idea here, it’s not worth violating my privacy to read a news that can be read ad and tracker free on the source website.

  • JazzlikeDiamond558@lemm.eeEnglish
    6·
    2 天前

    Not sure what you think you have described in your post, but that - is not journalism, much less traditional journalism.

    So, to forward your dislike towards something that you have either not experienced, or seen, or have no understanding of - is pointless.

    I mean, if you were born receltly, then you might have a picture that, what is being offered online (or even generally in the media) might be branded as journalism (which is not), however, the truth is that ‘‘news’’ today is (95%) nothing but a clickbait industry and has very little,if anything, to do with journalism.

    The remaining 5% is actually - journalism, but that, just as any other thing for which someone else had put some education, effort and sacrifice in, has to be compensated.

    Product advertising is something we have ad- block for. So far, in my life, I have never ever seen, heard or met a person that has convinced me that I need something they have.