Inside the Collapse of The New Republic - The New Yorker: "... On the morning of October 24th, Vidra made his first appearance at T.N.R.’s Washington offices for a presentation to the whole staff. He opened a PowerPoint slide show and stood up to address the group. “I like to walk around when I speak,” he said. He offered a series of statements intended to describe a transformation that could make the magazine profitable, but it came across to the editors as a jumble of clichés and tech jargon. “We’re going to be a hundred-year-old startup,” he said. The magazine needed “to align ourselves from the metabolism perspective” and create “magical experiences for both the content and the product design” and be “fearless in innovation and experimentation” and “change some of the DNA of the organization.” He said that he wanted to institute “a process for annual reviews” and effect a “cultural change where we need to just embrace innovation, experimentation, and cross-functional collaboration,” and said that the editors, writers, and business side would need to “speak to each other much more effectively and efficiently in our gatherings” in order “to take us to the next stage.” Vidra didn’t mention the magazine’s journalism. “Never did he once allude to the history of the magazine,” a former staffer said. “It was just terrifying rhetoric about change without any substance to back it up.”..." (read more at the link above) more news below
Why I Am Teaching a Course Called “Wasting Time on the Internet” - The New Yorker: "... Similarly, I have no doubt that the students in “Wasting Time on the Internet” will use Web surfing as a form of self-expression. Every click is indicative of who we are: indicative of our likes, our dislikes, our emotions, our politics, our world view. Of course, marketers have long recognized this, but literature hasn’t yet learned to treasure—and exploit—this situation. The idea for this class arose from my frustration with reading endless indictments of the Web for making us dumber. I’ve been feeling just the opposite. We’re reading and writing more than we have in a generation, but we are reading and writing differently—skimming, parsing, grazing, bookmarking, forwarding, retweeting, reblogging, and spamming language—in ways that aren’t yet recognized as literary..."
The social network announced that starting in January, it would change the rankings of some posts made by marketers, such as pitches to install a new mobile app or tune into a TV show, to reduce the number that appear in the news feeds of its 1.35 billion global users. That is likely to mean that fewer fans of a retailer will see its notice about a big sale and fewer fans of a video game company will see a post promoting its latest app. Even posts from big advertisers that spend millions of dollars on Facebook ads will vanish from the news feeds of their fans unless they turn them into ads. “It’s a clear message to brands: If you want to sound like an advertiser, buy an ad,” said Rebecca Lieb, a digital advertising and media analyst at the Altimeter Group... But Jordan Bitterman, chief strategy officer for North America at Mindshare, a digital advertising agency that is part of WPP, said Facebook continually made it more difficult for marketers to use its platform effectively, especially for content beyond traditional ads. “Facebook is basically saying that their algorithm will be the arbiter of what’s promotion and what’s not promotion,” Mr. Bitterman said. source: NYTimes.com
When is a company's Facebook post not an ad? - CNET: "... Some of those who represent advertisers are unhappy with Facebook's new stance. Jordan Bitterman, chief strategy officer of media company Mindshare, sniffed to the Times: "Facebook is basically saying that their algorithm will be the arbiter of what's promotion and what's not promotion." But isn't it all promotion? Facebook is merely choosing which promotions it likes and which it doesn't. You see, companies are just like people. After all, aren't we all on Facebook to advertise ourselves too?" more news below
In the New York Times and every other MSM, it doesn't matter whether the "facts" match the "narrative"-- in the realm of MSM a reporter's job is to manufacture "facts" to match the pre-determined "narrative."
Marco.org: "... Almost every time I’ve talked to a reporter has gone this way: they had already decided the narrative beforehand. I’m never being asked for information — I’m being used for quotes to back up their predetermined story, regardless of whether it’s true. (Consider this when you read the news.) Misquotes usually aren’t mistakes — they’re edited, consciously or not, to say what the reporter needs them to say...."