> Who is making strides in fixing the underlying business model problems that are driving the increasing virulence and frequency of these moral panics, and undermining the integrity and function of journalism?
Nobody, because the "underlying business model problem" is that, contra their stated preference, people don't want real journalism, or at least don't want it enough to pay for it. They want easily digestible fluff that validates the opinions they already have, and if they don't get that, they'll leave an angry pseudo-profound comment about "bias" and then go somewhere else where they can get more acceptable opinions. The internet is not lacking for such places.
Facebook and Google are not blameless here, but while they are accelerating these trends by making the market more frictionless, at the end of the day they can't be blamed for the fact that people's revealed preference is for opinionated clickbait and not fact-checked serious journalism.
Generally agreed with comments here. It isn't really a business model problem, it's just that in the US, our laissez-faire, internet-enabled capitalist system is just uniquely optimized to enable this stuff at scale and at faster cycle time. (radio in 30s germany could be parallel..don't know enough)
So, we're in a tricky situation.
Given that:
1. fundamentally we are just a rabid pack of stimuli seeking animals on a ravenous, desperate hunt for our next emotionally titillating hit
and
2. we've decided that in our (U.S.) implementation of liberal democracy, for the most part, freedom of speech is super protected and businesses are free to peddle pretty much whatever titillation they want (as long as no harm to others, per JS Mill On Liberty, etc..) unfettered by governance
how do we ensure that the public sphere doesn't devolve into a savage, mindless flurry of pure vitriol, slander, and falsehood
in the past we've leaned on a few structures to overcome these tendencies: an aristocratic taste-maker class steeped in classical tradition; authoritarian dictate; religious institutions that appealed to moral orders beyond earthly sin
obviously these structures had deep, DEEP issues, and we've rightly moved towards casting them aside
so what's next?
how to we bake reason into our societal architecture without relying on the problematic structures of yore?
Or should we just have faith that, despite these trying times, the better instincts of humanity shall prevail and we'll lift ourselves out of the morass--perhaps brought to our senses by some charismatic, enlightened leader utilizing moral-suasion and a made-for-tv personality....or some other mechanism of mass-englightenment
Another angle is that "real journalism" is fiction. Stronger than "people don't want it" is that it doesn't even exist.
Suppose Zuck, Musk, Gates, Bezos, and Bloomberg pooled their cash, with matching funds from Uncle Sam, into a blind trust to fund "real journalism." What then?
Nobody, because the "underlying business model problem" is that, contra their stated preference, people don't want real journalism, or at least don't want it enough to pay for it. They want easily digestible fluff that validates the opinions they already have, and if they don't get that, they'll leave an angry pseudo-profound comment about "bias" and then go somewhere else where they can get more acceptable opinions. The internet is not lacking for such places.
Facebook and Google are not blameless here, but while they are accelerating these trends by making the market more frictionless, at the end of the day they can't be blamed for the fact that people's revealed preference is for opinionated clickbait and not fact-checked serious journalism.