Free Press

New Media Versus Silicon Valley

The disrupters have become the disrupted in only a few short years.

|

The DEMO Conference/Flickr

Recent revelations that Silicon Valley entrepreneur Peter Thiel has been quietly underwriting lawsuits against digital muckraking platform Gawker have doused new fuel on a simmering conflict between technologists and journalists. But this current dustup is about a lot more than the bad blood between these two behemoths. It's about creative destruction in news media and the friction of dealing with a world in which many of the remaining information-gatekeepers are being disrupted.

On the surface, this incident appears personal, so the resulting discussion has tended to be largely tribal. Thiel, who was incensed when the defunct Gawker tech-news site Valleywag outed him as a homosexual, views Gawker and its founder Nick Denton as unethical rumormongers who profit from slander and "bullying people even when there [is] no connection with the public interest." Journalists at Gawker and many other publications see things a bit differently. And from their position, a powerful tech billionaire acting as an angel-investor in lawsuits against controversial media companies appears immediately threatening to their means of earning a living and to the freedom of the press more broadly.

Of course, funding a legal case on another's behalf does not in itself affect a court's decision—particularly when the underwriter remains anonymous, as Thiel did. As Eugene Kontorovich of the Volokh Conspiracy pointed out at the The Washington Post, a violation of privacy is a violation of privacy, and it doesn't matter whether the case was self-funded, aided by public interest groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), or even paid for by a lone technologist. Yet this plain fact is ill comfort for those digital journalists harboring existential anxieties about their place in society and their relationship to powerful groups that they fear can make or break their livelihoods.

As Goes Gawker… 

Most of this is overblown. Gawker versus Thiel isn't really about Gawker or Thiel. Rather, this incident can be better understood as a dramatic escalation of a difficult technological trend in news media that has been perceived but ignored for some time. Silicon Valley has built technologies that are disrupting both traditional and new channels of information distribution alike. The Gawker/Thiel spectacle is at its core a story about the pains of creative destruction.

The Internet has had an accelerating effect on media. Online platforms like Gawker became successful in the brutal market of News 2.0 by delivering the salacious content that their readers demanded—and fast. The buzz and ad dollars generated by "junk food" clickbait were then channeled to such platforms' more serious news operations. Gawker vehicles published tabloid gossip and commentary, but also broke a genuine scoop or two. Indeed, only a few weeks ago, Gizmodo broke the major story that Facebook might be politically censoring conservative stories on the platform. Legacy news organizations, meanwhile, were left to ape these proven clickbait techniques while trying to maintain some level of journalistic integrity and content.

The legacy establishments were not safe from techno-colonization, either. Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes caused a veritable exodus from The New Republic after he unveiled his plans to reshape the recently-purchased magazine as a "vertically integrated digital media company" last year. The Washington Post, too, was poached by Amazon's Jeff Bezos in 2014, who proceeded to oversee experiments with PostEverything, Storyline, and Morning Mix. ESPN had Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight, the New York Times had the Upshot, the Atlantic had Quartz. By 2015, the Atlantic was gushing over how the Buzzfeed-age was "[changing] the way the news industry works." NBCUniversal put major money into Vox and Buzzfeed a few months later.

Considered in context, Gawker cannot be pigeonholed as merely a lone muckraker spewing irrelevant garbage. It did do that, but it also piloted and perfected a new form of news media that eventually came to dominate the industry.

As goes Gawker, so could go the world of the chattering classes. News media companies and outside investors have poured millions of dollars into such platforms since the last recession. Native digital platforms promised decent news gigs for new journalists trying to launch a career. Much of the news industry has been reoriented around the new digital structure. And before we know it, the whole thing could come crashing down.

From Disrupters to the Disrupted

The Code Conference describes itself as "an invitation-only event where top industry influencers gather for in-depth conversations about the current and future impact of digital technology on our lives." The event is hosted by Recode of the Vox media family and draws some of the biggest names in technology and media. Nick Denton was there last week, firing off against "thin-skinned Silicon Valley billionaires." The next day, Silicon Valley billionaire and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos shared his vision to build factories on the moon. Fellow billionaire Elon Musk later opined that humans may already be cyborgs.

The color commentary from these figures largely overshadowed one of the most important speeches of the day: Mary Meeker's 2016 Internet trends report. Meeker is a partner at Kleiner Perkins, one of the most established venture capital firms in Silicon Valley. Each year, her data-heavy slides on the pulse and trends of the technology world is considered essential reading for everyone involved in this space. She foresaw robust penetration in foreign markets in the early 2000's and the fast rise of mobile by the end. This year, her outlook is rather bleak.  

Internet growth is slowing down and may portend a global economic downturn. Profits gained from the low-hanging fruit of targeting developing countries for new devices and Internet services are dwindling at a worrying rate. What's worse, many online ads are now known to be ineffective or even counterproductive. China is slowing down. India probably cannot save us. "Easy growth is behind us," Meeker conceded.

If Meeker's inclinations are correct, then much of the drama surrounding the Gawker/Thiel dispute becomes more understandable. New-media companies boldly entered into a Faustian bargain with technology. They leveraged the scale and speed that the internet affords to bypass old gatekeepers and remake the media in their image. But the catch was significant: Keep up, or get left behind. Clicks became a currency which was steadily debased. Good reporting and analysis became an unfortunate casualty. When enough market players realize that these companies are massively overvalued, it's going to get ugly. 

We can already observe the beginning of the downturn right now. Top traffic generators such as Gawker, FiveThirtyEight, and Mediaite have suffered sharp declines in visits over the past months. A week after it raised $15 million with Turner Broadcasting, Mashable cut its whole political reporting unit, much of its global news team, and a handful of its editorial video producers. The International Business Times and VICE are having trouble as well and Buzzfeed has had to slash over-optimistic forecasts premised on constant growth. Even Gawker had started to trim down and button up before this latest brouhaha cropped up to crystallize the angst of this cohort's impending economic doom.

There is a kind of irony in the new media's rallying salvo against the Silicon Valley technologists that now seem to have the upper hand. Nate Silver provides a good example of this position: "Silicon Valley has unprecedented, monopolistic power over the future of journalism. So much power that its moral philosophy matters."

Now that the technological wave that recently compelled new media companies to power threatens to crash on their own heads, they start to sound more like the legacy media companies that they once upended. As venture capitalist Marc Andreessen shot back: "Journalism was, of course, far more centralized, homogenous, and monopolistic before the Internet." The disrupters have become the disrupted in only a few short years, and it's probably only going to accelerate.

Information Markets Want to Be Free

So what comes next? 

Some new-media platforms may reorganize and survive, but not without major bloodletting and a good amount of grumbling. Many of them could close completely or be rolled into another outlet. Legacy news organizations that have maintained a reputation for deep analysis and factual reporting may find themselves in a better position as consumers seek out more trusted sources of information. But it's unlikely that the "fast food" internet reporting that has dominated the industry will continue in its current form.

This is not to say that people will not crave digital junk. They will, but they will be able to get it using a much cheaper apparatus.

Several groups of developers have been working on launching decentralized "information markets" that empower people to deliver news and data directly to those who value it the most. This can be as simple as posting a bounty for information that will be paid upon verification of facts, or as complex as a conditional futures market that interprets market prices as a "prediction" of future events. As Robin Hanson, one of the leading information-market theoreticians, explains, "the fact that a trader must 'put his money where his mouth is' means that the things people do say in information markets can be more easily believed."

You're probably already familiar with one kind of information market: the prediction market. InTrade was a popular prediction market that allowed people to buy and sell "contracts" about the likelihood of some future event. It became well-known during political elections because its market prices provided insight into each candidate's odds throughout the campaign. Unfortunately, a fluke of U.S. commodities futures regulations brought scrutiny upon the platform in 2012,  which led to InTrade's eventual demise.

Some developers are building information markets on top of distributed blockchain technologies so that there is no "operator" to target and shut down. The Darkleaks project, for instance, allowed whistleblowers and criminals alike to verify and sell sensitive information anonymously on the Bitcoin blockchain. The Augur market is built on the Ethereum platform and seeks to harness the profit mechanism to optimize forecasting. BitBet is similar, but built on Bitcoin. In each of these cases, there is theoretically no "Intrade, Inc." that a body like the CFTC can target to take down. This will not, of course, save project developers from an overzealous regulatory body that simply makes up new authority. But in many cases, technology does have a way of getting around regulations—if only because it moves so fast.

Information technology is accelerating so rapidly that it can undermine the leaders who thought themselves to be ahead of the curve before they really even realize it. The techniques that are championed by today's titan of media technology can tomorrow just as easily undermine the large-scale news operations they built. The future of news media has never been more uncertain, but one thing is for sure: Modern journalists are living in interesting times indeed.

NEXT: In America, Muslims Are More Likely to Support Gay Marriage Than Evangelical Christians

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. My principles say all libel and other laws are violation of free speech, requiring subjective verdicts enforced by government jackboots. Fraud is different in that if it results in harm, then that alone is sufficient for criminal charges, and if there is no harm, then there is no crime.

    But I also get entertainment value from statists being hoisted by their own petard.

    Let’s see … Gawker et al constantly bray for state power to enforce their feelz. Gawker gets sued into bankruptcy using state power.

    Winner winner chicken dinner!

    1. What do you do when the libel and slander results in actual damages?

      Suppose you ran a business like your handle, and someone who was never your customer claims to the world that “Scarewcrow and WoodChipper Repair returned my chipper in pieces, I had to pay someone else twice what I paid him just to fix his mistakes”, loudly enough and often enough that you lose business? Should there not be some form of redress? Or is this libel just dandy because he’s free to say whatever?

      1. It’s a good thing the idiots running Gawker never even tried to hide under the umbrella of libel laws. The just found a sex tape of a celeb and tried to get rich off of that.

        1. I was asking S how his absolutist position on libel would work with regards to the avenue I regard libel as being a legitimate tort. Why bring gawker into this?

      2. Actual damages? If you had RTFA, you’d see that I said the actual harm is the crime, and the associated libel/slander/fraud is immaterial.

        1. I went back and reread my comment, and see I was not clear about that, implying that harm is crime only for fraud, not for libel or slander.

          To sum up what I thought I said: If there is actual harm, that is the crime, and libel, slander, fraud, etc, are irrelevant, although I suppose you could use them to show intent. And if there is no actual harm, then the libel, slander, fraud, etc are also irrelevant.

    2. Anybody can earn 450dollar+ daily… You can earn from 8000-15000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity..
      Go to this site home tab for more detail… Go this Website========== http://www.earnmore9.com

  2. OT alleged primitive weapon turned out to be not-quite so primitive device. Still it’s no 40 watt plasma rifle

    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2…..use-ar-15/

    1. so, if it’s a modular weapon convertable to different calibres, which calibre did he use?

      1. If he picked 7.62X39 that will really mess up their narritive about banning a specific weapon.

        Either way he definitely chose not to be cliche

        1. I doubt they care about specifics. They just want rifles with detachable mags banned. Then on to the next target group.

          1. Even if the media does not report it, that kind of info should eventually be released because of Florida records laws. Unlike Newtown Team Blue will have a hard time keeping anything under the rug do to Sunshine Laws

            1. Israeli press is amazed police waited for hours to enter , did they really think a Jihadi was planning to surrender ? A lot of people bled out while political correctness had its way .

  3. Evan . if you, thought Gladys `s story is impossible… on saturday I got a new Alfa Romeo since getting a check for $5834 recently and-in excess of, ten thousand this past-munth . it’s definitly the best work Ive ever done . I began this 4 months ago and almost immediately started bringing in at least $80.. p/h . you could look here …
    ………………….. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  4. Hey Nate Silver, quit posting irrelevant garbage on your website (the ultimate wedding playlist!!!!!!) and I will not think your website is full of irrelevant garbage.

    1. And they didn’t even have the fucking “Chicken Dance”!

  5. Evan . if you, thought Gladys `s story is impossible… on saturday I got a new Alfa Romeo since getting a check for $5834 recently and-in excess of, ten thousand this past-munth . it’s definitly the best work Ive ever done . I began this 4 months ago and almost immediately started bringing in at least $80.. p/h . you could look here …
    ………………….. http://www.MaxPost30.com

    1. Evan’s not here, man.

      1. This was in response to a spambot comment that got deleted, but i sort of like where it ended up.

      2. Neither is Dave, man.

        And Zed’s dead, baby… Zed’s dead.

  6. I sure do wish we could return to the day when everybody trusted Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst to tell you all the truth you needed to know. Now I gotta sort through multiple news outlets trying to figure out what the facts are and what they mean and what’s important and significant and what’s just trivial nonsense distracting me from the main point and that’s just too much trouble. Spoon-feed me, goddammit!

  7. The buzz and ad dollars generated by “junk food” clickbait were then channeled to such platforms’ more serious news operations.

    Shouldn’t the phrase “serious news operations” be in scare quotes?

  8. All those words trying to portray this as new when it’s really not (but don’t blame the author, most relatively young people think the world was invented just yesterday).

    The media has always been obsessed with ‘clicks’ (i.e., people buying the product, reading the content). What were the NY Post’s headlines if not a cry of ‘buy me, read me’ to the public? What was the National Enquirer and Fleet Street’s rags if not the equivalent of Gawker’s salacious and otherwise non-newsworthy stories?

    And while the Internet allows the media to publish faster, it isn’t as if the previously longer lead times led them to be exemplars of good behavior and editorial control. As long as there’s been a media, there have been times where they’ve been criticized (and sued) for libel, invasion of privacy and so on… just like today.

  9. News media for the most part are now statist progressive shills trying to sell their ridiculous narratives. Guns are responsible for crime, there is an opioid epidemic, people can change their sex by wishing hard enough and self-mutilation, Islam is a religion of peace , Obama is a genius , Hillary has accomplished something in her life , the government is vital to your survival and the bigger it is the more it can help you , journalists are honest , self-sacrificing arbiters of truth and very insightful too . If I wanted to read a bunch of nonsensical hateful idiocy I could read Marvel comics or the koran , at least the Koran is free .

  10. 3″I quit my 9 to 5 job and now I am getting paid 98usd hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was forced to try-something NEW. After two years, I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out what i do.

    >>>>>>>>> http://www.Today70.com

  11. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK=====>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  12. Awesome article but I was hoping it’d mention WeSearchR

  13. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  14. my friend’s mom makes $73 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her pay was $18731 just working on the laptop for a few hours…..

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ???????

    http://www.Reportmax20.com

  15. my roomate’s step-mother makes 60 each hour on the internet and she has been out of work for seven months but last month her check was 14489 just working on the internet for 5 hours a day, look at ..
    Read more on this web site..

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.maxincome20.com

  16. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  17. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  18. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.