I dont know. This seems only approach problem from one way (what alternative food can be made avaliable ). But main problem is (people choose to eatbad food).
There are alternative to both FOX News and Twitter. Many people do use alternative. But people choose to use FOX News and Twitter. There are episode where Trump supporters abandon FOX News because it failed to endorse stolen election theory. People WANT to be lied to, they prefer FOX News, its their genuine choice. Alternative media wouldn't work if people keep watch FOX News.
I would argue exactly the same about food in America. Americans are not eating worse food than people of other nations because they are somehow genetically programmed to pick bad food. They do it because that is the food being offered.
I eat much worse when I lived in the US. That wasn't because I suddenly changed as a person but because the food culture around me totally changed. The type of foods available and how it was packaged, sold and offered.
If people make their choices independent of the environment they are in, then nobody would ever have spent a dime on ads.
Your Stolen Election example illustrate my point. I argue against for-profit media. Your example shows the problem. Because they are profit driven they embrace whatever sells such as lies about the elections. It is why social media algorithms promote extremism and lies. It makes more money.
You cannot just give people what they want. My kids would eat candy every day probably if they had the choice. But they don't get what they want. They get what they need. I am sure people don't want to hear challenges to their ideas but that is what they need to hear.
As to alternatives. What is my alternative to YouTube? No service can remotely compare in terms of breath of content. Social media is a case of networking effects where first mover status and volume matters. Media platforms with more users and more content will have a tremendous advantage over those with less.
That is specifically why I talk about affluent trusts buying media platforms or having serious fund to finance growth of alternative platforms. Uber is an excellent example. Their app could have been made by almost anyone with some coding skills.
What made the key difference was cash. Uber spent money to get people to drive for them and subsidized rides to get people to use them. It is because they understood the point I make about volume. People pick whatever service is bigger, all other things being equal. Size is of tremendous importance. They also used ads a lot.
It is why you need tremendous financial muscle to offer real realistic alternatives in the media space. Joe Average just setting up some alternative Twitter or YouTube doesn't matter shit. It is all about reach.
Remember I wrote about the volume of your microphone. That is exactly what I am talking about. It is the same with food in the US. Did healthier options exist? Sure, but nowhere near as easily accessible and prevalent as the unhealthy options. Saying "well you chose it" is a bit like saying Iranian authoritarianism is the fault of the voters because they keep electing bad guys. It ignores that they are only given shitty options.
You cannot blame viewers on Fox propagating lies about the elections. Why was the viewers such in their mind that they would leave Fox if they didn't lie about the elections to them in favor of Trump?
Because Fox and similar media made them that way. Fox propaganda and lies over decades made that kind of viewer who wants to be served the lies. This is like beating a dog all its life making it aggressive and then using the aggression of the dog as the reason you need to beat the dog.
No, man, you made the aggressive dog. You made the problem you profess to tackle. It is an old story. It is what Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. People are appalled by the evil and brutality of the monster, but as Mary Shelley points out the behavior of he monster is merely and outcome of the way it has been treated by its creator Frankenstein.
I see the MAGA voters as the monster of Frankenstein, and the likes of Fox are Frankenstein. They are the makers of this mess. Change has to begin with the media. The brainwashed viewers are not the ones who are going to lead the change.
I dont know. This seems only approach problem from one way (what alternative food can be made avaliable ). But main problem is (people choose to eatbad food).
There are alternative to both FOX News and Twitter. Many people do use alternative. But people choose to use FOX News and Twitter. There are episode where Trump supporters abandon FOX News because it failed to endorse stolen election theory. People WANT to be lied to, they prefer FOX News, its their genuine choice. Alternative media wouldn't work if people keep watch FOX News.
I would argue exactly the same about food in America. Americans are not eating worse food than people of other nations because they are somehow genetically programmed to pick bad food. They do it because that is the food being offered.
I eat much worse when I lived in the US. That wasn't because I suddenly changed as a person but because the food culture around me totally changed. The type of foods available and how it was packaged, sold and offered.
If people make their choices independent of the environment they are in, then nobody would ever have spent a dime on ads.
Your Stolen Election example illustrate my point. I argue against for-profit media. Your example shows the problem. Because they are profit driven they embrace whatever sells such as lies about the elections. It is why social media algorithms promote extremism and lies. It makes more money.
You cannot just give people what they want. My kids would eat candy every day probably if they had the choice. But they don't get what they want. They get what they need. I am sure people don't want to hear challenges to their ideas but that is what they need to hear.
As to alternatives. What is my alternative to YouTube? No service can remotely compare in terms of breath of content. Social media is a case of networking effects where first mover status and volume matters. Media platforms with more users and more content will have a tremendous advantage over those with less.
That is specifically why I talk about affluent trusts buying media platforms or having serious fund to finance growth of alternative platforms. Uber is an excellent example. Their app could have been made by almost anyone with some coding skills.
What made the key difference was cash. Uber spent money to get people to drive for them and subsidized rides to get people to use them. It is because they understood the point I make about volume. People pick whatever service is bigger, all other things being equal. Size is of tremendous importance. They also used ads a lot.
It is why you need tremendous financial muscle to offer real realistic alternatives in the media space. Joe Average just setting up some alternative Twitter or YouTube doesn't matter shit. It is all about reach.
Remember I wrote about the volume of your microphone. That is exactly what I am talking about. It is the same with food in the US. Did healthier options exist? Sure, but nowhere near as easily accessible and prevalent as the unhealthy options. Saying "well you chose it" is a bit like saying Iranian authoritarianism is the fault of the voters because they keep electing bad guys. It ignores that they are only given shitty options.
You cannot blame viewers on Fox propagating lies about the elections. Why was the viewers such in their mind that they would leave Fox if they didn't lie about the elections to them in favor of Trump?
Because Fox and similar media made them that way. Fox propaganda and lies over decades made that kind of viewer who wants to be served the lies. This is like beating a dog all its life making it aggressive and then using the aggression of the dog as the reason you need to beat the dog.
No, man, you made the aggressive dog. You made the problem you profess to tackle. It is an old story. It is what Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. People are appalled by the evil and brutality of the monster, but as Mary Shelley points out the behavior of he monster is merely and outcome of the way it has been treated by its creator Frankenstein.
I see the MAGA voters as the monster of Frankenstein, and the likes of Fox are Frankenstein. They are the makers of this mess. Change has to begin with the media. The brainwashed viewers are not the ones who are going to lead the change.
https://nicholasdecker.substack.com/p/this-article-is-about-the-news
This economic article seems indicate that media is "demand-generated", people would read media that its want. Supply is not the problem.