[specproc]

I've been working in a PR-type space recently. That narrative is the subject of war between so many different actors.

The worst thing is watching everyone around me, even very intelligent people, get so angry over a space that is so heavily fabricated, optimised even for that very same outrage.

[narrator]

I think the idea that news does things for ratings and therefore money is not really true. Control of the narrative is vastly more lucrative for other stakeholders in these organizations. Some of these news organizations like the Washington Post for example lost $77 million last year. Fox news fired Tucker Carlson, the most popular news anchor in the channel's history. This is not an economically driven business, at least in terms of the news outlet's own profit and loss.

Non-profits give away billions and billions for non-economic reasons, they'd probably fund these loss making news outlets, and they indeed fund many non-economic advocacy organizations because they help them change the widely believed narratives to support their respective missions.

[_wire_]

> Fox news fired Tucker Carlson, the most popular news anchor in the channel's history. This is not an economically driven business

Nonsense example. Carlson was the figurehead for a narrative that cost Murdoch $800 million in defamation.

https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2023/jul/26/tucker-carlson...

[RajT88]

Carlson has not been a news anchor his entire time at Fox News - he would be more fairly called a commentator or show host.

He was a commentator when he was on CNN as well. He has never been a news anchor.

I would swear as well in court Fox News claimed he was an 'entertainer' at some point.