Media outlets are incentivized to bring in clicks/shares/likes. They're not incentivized to research stories sufficiently, so...a shaky lead from a sketchy source but a super compelling headline? Of course that gets published.
Taking this as some anti-conservative war from the tech industry is super misleading.
Even an individual who posts a blog post wants clicks/shares/likes, even if there's no money involved, to validate their work in putting out a post and to bolster their self-esteem. That highlights why capitalism is not itself the issue; any type of news media would just respond to what its customers want. And what the public wants is infotainment, not well-researched stories.
The real problem is people and that's a problem that can't be solved.
Yes, in a way, but also obviously not. If that was their only/primary driver, they'd go all click bait all the time. They wouldn't report things that aren't loved by the masses.
They clearly do, so clicks/shares/likes can't be their primary things.
I do believe that it's partially right, it's just not number one. Number one is agenda, and within the pool of stories that benefit the agenda of the company, they choose what generates most engagement.
There's certainly a part of "we need money from ads", but being able to influence the political decisions of a nation is power. That's a value in and by itself, it's not just something you wield to sell ads.
Very wrong, but we both know that. Not the brightest war for leftie tech companies to be provoking though.
Capitalism is trash, but this is traditional kleptocracy. Both sides are conservative; one is literally running to "restore normality."
It's having a centralised government (which can be used to obtain a lot of power) that create an incentive for misinformation.