- Spotted by Ben Evans.
- The Economist article is here.
- And the backstory is:
A day before US Elections The New York Times reported a 84% to 16% chance for Hillary to win. After the election day in the op-ed column no apologies for this huge mistake, misinformation, unprofessionalism.
That means this practice is OK for the leading old media outlet. This means they are going forward with this practice even if it was proven fake, false, unreal.
But someone has to pay for that. And they’ve picked the new media led by Google, Facebook, Twitter and co — since they not just were OK on who will win the election but even influenced it, via fake news.
Fake news old media is crying wolf on fake news new media. This war is hopefuly will benefit us, good old readers.
One update
Comment date
Comment content
It seems professional journalism in the case of The Guardian pays off: https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21735046-two-years-ago-newspaper-was-making-existentially-worrying-losses-next-year-it-hopes-break
Comment permalink
∞