Making sense of the MSM business strategy, Daniel Greenfield explains much more
Daniel Greenfield, the Shillman journalism fellow at the Freedom Center, regularly comes up with original perspectives, reframing the media output we all consume into more realistic assessments. His article at Frontpagemag today ties together a lot of recent events.
He posits that the media have forsaken journalism, which is expensive, and converted to "story laundering" as their function, by which he means receiving and transcribing stories produced by interested parties. This is undeniably true, in that newsrooms have been downsized and experienced pros replaced with Ben Rhodes's notorious description: "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns."
The media is trying to cash in on the institutional legacy of the corporations that bear the old names, but have no functional resemblance to what the news business used to be. Today's media isn't in the news business. Its outlets report the news only to the degree that they have to. And when they do, they rely on viral stories or rewriting an original report. The media's real business is serving as a clearinghouse for narratives. These clearinghouses operate out of major urban power centers. They know next to nothing about much of the country. And they don't care. It's why they didn't see Trump's victory coming.
What makes the piece so interesting is the way Greenfield ties this business strategy to our current situation.
What ties together the debate about Russian collusion, fake news and Fusion GPS is the implosion of the media. What were the professional reporters doing while Rhodes was manipulating the 27-year-olds? They were working at places like Fusion GPS and 'story laundering' narratives to the kiddies.
Read this if only to understand what Greenfield means by this formulation:
Trump doesn't just outrage the media politically. He's a threat to their business model.