Hacker News Reader

Comment by paxys | Hacker News Reader

"The news media industry is dying because of tech" is a massively successful myth perpetuated by the news media industry.

Back in the day before tech platforms there used to be 5 successful news companies and 5 failing ones. Today there are 5 successful news companies and 500 failing ones. Tech reduced the barriers to entry and made the playing field more level, giving rise to smaller publications and indie journalism. But the appetite for news consumption is still the same, so everyone can't be successful.

Lobbying and passing rent-seeking laws only helps the conglomerates on the top.

View on HN

> "The news media industry is dying because of tech" is a massively successful myth perpetuated by the news media industry.

Why do you think that's a myth? The news industry was always reliant on advertising for revenue. The tech giants of the Internet era all figured out how to better target advertisements, so a huge amount of that advertising money shifted from news to tech giants (and not just tech "giants" - Craigslist basically killed classified ads, and Craigslist isn't exactly a "giant").

I don't really know if the news media industry is "dying", but of course tech was hugely instrumental in reducing the overall amount of revenue that goes to journalism.

The news industry is still getting money via ads, same as before. The only thing that has changed is the broker that is connecting them to the advertisers. Print media had its own ad ecosystem, and the online one is controlled by Google and Facebook (but of course the media companies can use whoever they want or even talk to advertisers directly). So what is the complaint exactly? That Google shouldn't take a cut? Except that the law isn't even about advertising, it's about link aggregation (which Google also happens to do, but that is completely separate from its advertising arm).

No, the news industry isn't still getting money same as before - the total ad revenue the industry is getting has significantly decreased.

Newspaper ad revenue has simply collapsed (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/28/audiences...) and it's not being replaced by digital media as digital ad revenue for news industry (as opposed to total digital ad revenue) is shrinking every year.

AFAIK, the news media is dying because it was taken over by malicious short-term focused MBAs that turned all of it into crap.

Honestly, I don't know what 5 successful companies you are talking about, but it's true that it's being replaced by lots and lots of small players that don't look anything like "big journalism".

Yes and no. There were thousands of moderately successful local papers that really don't exist anymore. They had a handful of different revenue streams (classifieds, real estate and auto sales ads) that have all been gradually eaten into by internet competition.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com