Design a site like this with
Get started

A Deep Dive Behind the Editorial Wall

At the moment my brain is brimming with a bunch of interconnected ideas … and this one needs to be addressed first of all.

Many years ago, when I first published my controversial ideas (way before I revised the nomenclature in “Hope & Change: Flipping the F-word & Removing the Old-Fashioned R-word” [ ], and also several years after I first began using the controversial nomenclature), I “pointed out” that one of the defining characteristics for irrational media is the so-called editorial wall between content and advertising.

This mythical wall is one of the primary signs of Western propaganda — and I will return to many aspects of the vast and far-reaching implications … but for now I want to (try to) focus on how it can be that so many people are so completely deluded and at the same time so completely unaware of their own delusions.

Let’s start with the basic business model of advertising-supported media:

In the vast majority of cases, this means that the editorial content is used as “filler” to create spaces to plaster advertisements onto.

That is, the so-called “wall” is not only permeable, its permeability is in fact the whole “bright idea” behind the business model. Let me add at this point, that there has been a significant shift regarding the so-called “traditional” publishing industry.

The traditional brand names are in fact quite bankrupt. Their own advertising model has been hollowed out by Google’s proprietary algorithms which match advertisers to users. Yet since most Google users lack adequate literacy skills to recognize that all of the results they see on Google are essentially links to Google advertising (whereas the rest of the WWW is not only “below the fold” but rather buried deep beneath the dung heap, far beyond the last page of ads), they actually believe in most of these advertising links, because they believe that the brand names are indeed reliable sources of information — which they usually aren’t.

The result is the the media landscape seen via Google is an innumerable bunch of bankrupt invalid and crippled companies, utterly lacking in any resources whatsoever (beyond the supposed value of their “traditional” brand names). Google itself keeps these companies on life support, because the Google Ads which appear on these “brand name” websites provide ample revenue for Google, with enough left over as table scraps just to keep the dogs alive and hungering for more.

I do think I need to admit that over the past years I have made a mistake in condemning all advertising. That was never my intention — except, perhaps, to the degree that the model is based on the notion that there are two (or more) kinds of content, which can be neatly separated and divided by some kind of insurmountable wall. This smoke and mirrors sort of hocus-pocus was (for me) simply quite obviously bullshit. I think the reason why the bullshit continued to sell like hotcakes is largely the idea that if one company was selling bullshit, another company could sell something better — the competitive economy, free market capitalism and all that jazz.

Of course, this is the house that Facebook built. While it has arguably become quite successful, it is no match for the behemoth Google. Not even Amazon can compare with the machine that owns the minds of so many, such religious followers. This is not what true competition looks like. This looks more like the 1% owning 99% of the wealth.

I think it would be a waste of time to investigate how we got here — suffice it to say: my hunch is that there were probably a lot of smoke-filled back room deals involved, and the fact that some of the world’s leading governments also made quite significant contributions to the playbook is nothing short of undeniable. My question has always been, and remains to this day: How do we get out of this mess?

Google is undeniably the world’s leading “social dilemma” [ ]. It is not the only one, but shy of being a monopoly, one can hardly say that the landscape is anything but monopolistic.

My proposed solution has been (and remains) to ignore brand names — to instead rely on the power of natural language. If anyone has another idea, I’m all ears! Until then, I will keep working on my next installment(s). In any case, I am not ready to give up.


By New Media Works

I'm just a regular person ;) If you want to know more, pls send me a msg -- thanks! :D

1 comment

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: