To a philosopher all news, as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea. —Henry David Thoreau
As the face of information gathering changes, we wonder if there is any news source left that we can trust
Well, fuck.
That just describes my morning, which started at 4:00 AM. Rain started falling while I was walking the dog. I accidentally punted a cat in the dark when we returned. I forgot to block the hallway and the damp dog decided to get in bed with Kat. I spilled my coffee. Then, immediately after clicking the link to a story that sounded interesting, a box pops up telling me this is the last of my free articles for the month. I’ve had better mornings.
The last item, the one about using my last free click for the month is happening more often. As an increasing number of newspapers have had to turn to paywalls to pay the bills, the number of reliable news sources accessible at any given time begins to shrink. A prime example is Business of Fashion, a UK-based fashion magazine that exists primarily online. Having been free since their inception, I’ve come to rely on its up-to-date information of everything going on in the fashion industry. Their news is not only timely but largely reliable. Starting this week, however, they’ve put everything behind a rather expensive paywall. Sure, it comes out to less than the price of a cup of coffee per day if I pay for the whole year in advance, but that would be quite a dent in our cash flow. So, I’ll have to deal with the five articles a month to which I am now limited.
Am I just cheap or is there a problem here?
Social News Junkies
I’ve always had an addiction of sorts to news. At one point, back when print was the only option, I subscribed to three different daily papers, four weekly magazines, and six monthlies. Our recycling bin was always overflowing and there was never any shortage of newsprint for craft projects. Mind you, at that particular point in time, I wasn’t writing a damn thing. All I did was take pictures all day. No one was interested in my opinion and I was much more careful about when and where I expressed such.
A lot has changed over the past 30 years, though. Print subscription rates have gone up, dramatically in some cases. Every major news and information source, from the New York Times to National Public Radio to your local television station has an online presence and, in most cases, when they first came online they were free. The number of news and information sources became so numerous that they gave rise to aggregators such as Huffington Post. The upside of aggregators is that they assembled all the really important stuff from a myriad of different sources. The downside was that they did so with a very marked and obvious political bias. Next came social media, which aggregated the aggregators, and as the volume of viewers grew into the millions the number of sources with blatant political motivations grew as well.
Now, we are faced with two problems. First, the original model of relying on display ads to pay the bills hasn’t worked. Over the past three years, the number of newspapers putting the majority of their content behind a paywall has tripled. They’ve had no choice. They still need to pay the bills. At the same time, however, the reliability of all news/information sources combined has declined, dramatically.
Freedom Of Information
Once upon a time, there was a reliable source of global information that was available to everyone: the public library. Any time I came across a reference to a source to which I wasn’t already subscribed, I could make my way to the library’s periodical section and most usually find the source I needed. Libraries are still there, of course, but as demand for space and revenue has shifted, resources have been removed from periodical subscriptions in favor of Internet needs. Walk into the beautiful downtown branch of the Indianapolis Public Library and the periodicals section is not only significantly smaller, it’s also hidden, relegated to a corner of the second floor.
While the shift away from print subscriptions seems to make sense on the surface, it hasn’t resulted in more online subscriptions. While libraries have invested thousands of dollars in computers with Internet access, those services don’t necessarily include online periodical subscriptions. Why? The majority of public computer use is not for reading periodicals. Job searches and educational programming dominate, right after checking one’s Facebook status. So, if the library doesn’t subscribe to the print edition of a periodical, access is still just as limited as it would be if one had just stayed home.
At the same time, as biased and unreliable sources of information increases, many sources we’ve long considered reliable are either downsizing or going away altogether. Titles that were once mainstays, such as Newsweek and US News And World Report are barely recognizable in their online forms. Reliable, honest information is quickly going the way of the Dodo bird.
Not As Informed As We Think
An informed electorate is necessary for a democracy to work. The entire system dissolves when the people doing the voting are no longer getting reliable, trustworthy information from which they can make intelligent decisions.
Look at us. Look at this election cycle. Consider the absolute nonsense one hears being spouted at political rallies. This is not an informed electorate. In fact, I would be willing to go out on a limb and guess that, at the very least, 70 percent of those who are voting in the upcoming election are making their decision based in part on incorrect and unfounded information. Whether it has come from Fox News or CNN or MSNBC is irrelevant. None of them are reliable. None of them can be trusted. Yet, those are the sources from which an overwhelming number of Americans get their news.
We need new sources of news. We need to know that the articles we’re reading have been vetted, that sources have been confirmed, and that the people and organizations doing the reporting are being held responsible for what they report. Americans, and citizens around the world, need to once again be able to trust the news and information they receive.
At the same time, I am of the opinion that there needs to be a greater distinction between actual news, that information that directly impacts our lives, and more casual forms of information. I may go to the newspaper for the box score of last night’s Cubs/Indians game, but if I want to know the ridiculous pre-game superstitions of the starting lineup I should have to find a different source. Our propensity for finding everything in one place is severely diminishing the value of everything we consume and news is at the very top of that list.
We’re Tired Of This Shit
A new research report from the Pew Research Center states that “More than one-third of social media users are worn out by the amount of political content they encounter.” I have to wonder if any part of that fatigue comes from the fact that, not only has this election cycle gone on far too long, we know all too well that the information being distributed through social media is either horribly slanted or an outright lie. We’re exhausted from trying to parse out what is true (very little) with what isn’t (far too much).
Something in my gut tells me that if the good folks at the Pew Center were to ask, they’d find that a large number of people are equally exhausted with all the social media content they encounter, with the possible exception of kitten videos. In an effort to make themselves more attractive to the masses, news sources have too often become little more than slightly modified versions of what People magazine once was, while sources such as People have become more like The National Enquirer. When we sit down to read what we presume to be a legitimate news article, we shouldn’t have to wonder whether the content and its sources are legitimate!
I understand the need for publications to resort to paywalls. The ad model just doesn’t work for them in an online environment. However, the more distance we put between the American populace and legitimate news sources, the few that remain, the more our democracy continues to erode. Uninformed people make stupid decisions in the voting booth. As bad as this election cycle has been, it can, and will, get worse. We need news sources that are reliable, honest, and accessible. Short of that, there is no hope for democracy to return to our country.
Personalized Shopping Could Get A Bit Creepy
I’m a champion for personal differences. All society should be much more personalized. —George M. Church
Having your total shopping experienced personalized to you sounds like a good thing until you read the small print
Please allow me to paint a scenario for you.
Imagine that you woke up this morning with a bit of a sniffle. As the seasons change, your allergies are acting up a bit; nothing serious but you should probably pick up some over-the-counter medication on your way to work. You down a cup of coffee and toast a bagel before heading out the door. Stopping at the convenient drug store just down the street, you pick up the allergy medication and your favorite candy bar. Work is stressful, as Mondays so often are, and you welcome the chance to get out of the office at lunch time. You decide to do a little shopping to cheer yourself up.
Walking into a department store just two doors down from your office, the first thing you see are some cute sweaters that would be perfect for wearing to work. You look for the price and a small LED screen tells you the sweater is 50% off the regular price. You can’t beat a deal like that. As you pick up a sweater in your size, your favorite song comes on the store’s music system. Paying for the sweater with the store’s credit card generates another 10% off the price and you’re beginning to feel as though this was a great bargain. The clerk hands you the receipt and on the back is a coupon for a bag full of your favorite candy bar.
You have just enough time to grab something to eat and when you enter the sidewalk cafe the waiter immediately suggests the vegetable soup, emphasizing its healthy properties. Finished with the soup, you return to work and get a call from your trainer at the gym. He suggests you stop by on your way home because, you know, Mondays are so very stressful.
A Highly Personalized Life
According to Joseph Turow, a professor of communication at the University of Pennsylvania, that highly personalized life experience is possibly less than a year away. His upcoming book, The Aisles Have Eyes comes out in January and covers the details of how and why all this personalization is happening. In an interview with Kaveh Waddell for The Atlantic magazine, Turow explains not only the upside of personalization but also the creepy dangers of living in such a connected world. Walking into a store and immediately finding what you want at a price you can afford sounds wonderful, but the details behind how that happens can be a bit disconcerting.
Of course, most of us already know that everything we do online is being tracked dozens of different ways. Every website you visit, every click you make, every product over which you briefly drool is noticed by something, somewhere, and that information is stored in a database for later influence. As a result, when another website feels the time is right, an ad pops up for that exact same product, touting a new, lower price. We get it. We know we’re being watched and our data is being collected.
What we’ve not realized, perhaps, is that it is not just our online activity that is being tracked. Everything we do is being noted by some app connected to some database. Our cell phones are most often the culprit. One app recognizes a sneeze and knows you may need coupons for a cold medicine. Another notices that you are driving more aggressively to work, indicating that you’re likely stressed even before you get there. Four different apps notice the purchase you make at the drug store and send an alert to the waiter at the cafe you just entered, suggesting that you might like the soup. It’s all possible, right now.
Nothing You Do Is Secret
Author George Orwell warned us about the constant oversight of a government he referred to as “Big Brother.” What Orwell didn’t imagine is that we would have apps and “reward” cards that collect far more information about us and our habits than his “Big Brother” could ever dream. Even more astonishing to Orwell is that we would hand over such information willingly. No one requires us to download the apps or accept the “reward” cards. We do so in the hopes of perhaps getting a bit of a discount on the things we buy.
Is a 10% discount worth giving up a lot of privacy? Apparently, we tend to think so. Rarely does anyone opt out of information gathering, especially once they’ve started using a program. For example, I just received my AARP card last week because I’m even older than Luke Perry. The card comes with a long list of “benefits” that include discounts for a lot of the things old people like me are apparently supposed to do, such as eat out and take trips. I read the small print, though. Anytime I use the card for a discount, AARP collects that information. They note not only which restaurant I dine at, but how much I spend. If I eat at a chain facility in multiple cities, that gets noticed as well. Over time, they are able to build a profile of my activities, which in turn, allows them to better “personalize” my “benefits.”
Do I mind AARP having that information? Not especially, because the presumption is that they use the information to my benefit. However, they also sell that information to “partners.” I would like to presume that those “partners” are equally safe, but how would we know? What are my options if one of those “partners” uses that information to start sending me spam? What if my health insurance rates go up because they see that what I’m eating probably isn’t helping my blood pressure a damn bit? Yeah, we might have a problem here.
The Potential For Abuse
While we all like the convenience of having everything personalized for us, the reality is that the information we give up could be used against us as well. From the article comes this question and answer:
Waddell: Is it legal for an advertiser or a retailer to decide, based on someone’s profile, like their race, that they’re higher risk and perhaps not show them certain goods?
Turow: Sure! Of course. They’ll never say that it’s because of race—and they wouldn’t do it just because of race. They’d do it because of, say, income. If you have the money, it doesn’t matter what race you are, from their standpoint—but race gets built in by virtue of where people live, their income brackets, and other things that are much less obvious.
I think age is going to be a major factor. It already is, among retailers. Income is going to be a big factor. And things that we don’t even think about, various concatenations of lifestyles that lead to certain predictions about what you will or will not read, or when you will or will not take a vacation, or if you will or will not have certain frequent-flier miles.
The ability to run through thousands of datapoints about you and compare them with thousands of datapoints about people you don’t even know, and then come up with a sense of what you will buy or not buy at what price: That’s the goal. The goal is to come up with a price for you that you accept based on the product they think you would want.
Personalization is great when it works in your favor, but we have to remember that all businesses need to make a profit. Therefore, they’re inherently going to look for ways to turn everything in their favor more than ours. If that means denying some people access to certain goods and services, then that is exactly what they’re going to do.
The Internet Of Things
Kat and I were watching last night’s episode of Madame Secretary before she left for school this morning. As part of the storyline where the family is being stalked, all of their “smart” appliances are hacked. The family becomes frightened when they realize that not even the presence of a physical security detail can protect them from someone taking control of the lights, the heat, and the appliances in their home.
When you hear people talking about “The Internet of Things,” they’re talking about how everything in our lives is becoming interconnected. Our appliances, the lights in our house, the heat, our phones, our insurance, and our shopping. Everything we do becomes a datapoint somewhere that connects to something else that connects to somewhere else. So, if your income is low and you show a history of having difficulty paying your bills, maybe an app starts shutting off the lights rather than leaving them on for hours on end, or adjusts the thermostat so you use less energy. Maybe your local grocery won’t sell you that big box of fried pies because they know you’re borderline diabetic. Perhaps the price on that pair of boots you like suddenly shoots up and is now more than you have the ability to cover.
Even worse, as events last week demonstrated, what happens when all our data gets hacked? There is no such thing as a totally safe database. That means the more information we allow people to collect, the more at risk we are of that information being stolen and used against us.
No, that’s not creepy at all, is it? Get ready, though. I don’t see any way to stop this phenomenon from happening, short of everyone on the planet unplugging and going back to binary means of commerce. Something tells me none of us are willing to do that. So, bend over and lube up. We’re not only getting screwed, we’re asking for it. Don’t worry, though; it’s all personalized.
Share this:
Like this: