Online Personalities and Comedians Overtake TV and Newspapers as Primary News Sources (hollywoodreporter.com)
- Reference: 0181740672
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/04/17/2138236/online-personalities-and-comedians-overtake-tv-and-newspapers-as-primary-news-sources
- Source link: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/online-personalities-comedians-overtake-tv-news-source-1236567562/
> The poll, which was conducted in March, actually found the conservative politicians and cabinet members, including President Trump, were the top news influencers. When politicos were excluded, Joe Rogan led the list, followed by Fox News personalities Greg Gutfeld and Sean Hannity, and then TuckerCarlson and Ben Shapiro. The only three influencers to crack 10 percent were Trump, Rogan, and JD Vance. Among people who voted for Kamala Harris, the top news personalities were late night hosts, led by ABC's Jimmy Kimmel, followed by CBS Late Show host Stephen Colbert, and Daily Show host Jon Stewart.
>
> Just under 70 percent of respondents said they get their news online in a given week, compared to 55 percent for TV, and 25 percent for newspapers. [...] Of traditional media outlets, TV dominated, with Fox News, the broadcast networks, and CNN topping the list of sources. Facebook, YouTube and Instagram were the most popular online news sources.
"On these platforms opinionated personalities and comedians appear to drown out anyone who would fit in the traditional journalist category," said assistant professor of practice and Jordan Center Executive Director Steven L Herman. "Even in the late 19th century and early 20th centuries, sensationalist and polarizing voices in print and later on air were among the most influential in the political landscape -- such as political satirist Mark Twain and populist Father Charles Coughlin."
[1] https://newslab.org/school/jordan-center/poll/
[2] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/online-personalities-comedians-overtake-tv-news-source-1236567562/
Billionaires bought up the news (Score:5, Insightful)
So yeah you're going to turn to randos for journalism because a handful of billionaires bought up literally 90% of all the news media and they are in the process of buying up and shutting down what little is left. There are serious efforts to undermine and shut down the associate press and Reuters. And they're basically the last source of Truth left. There used to be a whole bunch of independent journalists who made a living on Twitter but well, you know.
So unless you just want billionaire Epstein class propaganda you've really got to go looking. There are several YouTubers I like. Belle of the ranch, Rebecca Watson, and professor Dave come to mind immediately. Patrick Boyle is pretty good too and so is Adam Something. I like some more news but I'm a pretty staunch Democrat at this point and they like to spend hours and hours crapping on Democrats for no particularly useful reason. I don't say good here because there's plenty of reasons to complain about Democrats but I don't find it useful in 2026..
But getting back on track yeah I'm not going to waste time on CBS or CNN let alone Fox News and news Max and oan because I know they're all owned by billionaires that have heavy control over what is allowed to be said and what isn't allowed to be said. So I can't get reliable information out of them.
I will sometimes settle for CNN if I have to they weren't able to go full Fox News but Lord knows they are trying.
Sadly (Score:3)
Comedians are, in fact, a more credible source of news than TV news or newspapers. They generally pay more attention to what's actually happening in the world.
Re:Sadly (Score:4)
When I can stand it, which is not often, I'll watch like Germany's DW or BBC. It usually has a much more vanilla take on what is happening. I was in a waiting room for my car and I took a break from my laptop. They had CNN scrolling across the big screen. It is just too much. I get it is headline, but my god, to watch the crimes of my country played over and over again was repulsive. At least with DW/BBC you see it once and they move on. Moreover they cover more than just US.
Re: Sadly (Score:2)
Comedians get their news from TV news and newspapers. The Friar's Club does not have bureaus in London, New York, and Hong Kong. They are not bringing the world unbiased original reporting.
"JR led the list..." (Score:1)
we may be fkd
Not New (Score:3)
There were surveys nearly 20 years ago that found that the most well-informed viewers of television news were people watching The Daily Show. If you can find a video of Jon Stewart's reaction, it's pretty great (basically "We make shit up" and "We air between South Park and fighting robots").
Re: (Score:2)
And yet their humorous take on the news was very much appreciated. I count myself among those who once considered themselves well informed, and I was a regularly Daily Show viewer. I also loved the various Canadian comedies over the years such as Double Exposure, Royal Canadian Air Farce, etc. And I still listen to BBC's the News Quiz when it is available. And Dead Ringers.
Trump is a parrot (Score:2, Informative)
Trump repeats Fox News, he is not a news source: When he is a source, we know it's a source of bullshit.
CNN, famous for their reporting in the '80s and '90s is a White House parrot like most US broadcast news. To me, MSNBC does the least parroting and offers better historical summaries.
Seeing the same second-hand copy appear in The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Verge, Pro Publica and Mother Jones is exhausting. It shows the competition for clicks and the lack of on
I saw a trump talking about a bill (Score:2)
Like a congressional bill. And in the middle of a sentence he suddenly started talking about a imaginary guy named Bill.
I don't think Trump is parroting Fox news, because I don't think his brain works enough anymore for him to do that. Maybe 8 years ago during his first presidency but right now his brain is just gone.
Just recently he went on a rant about how terrible the country was a year ago without realizing he was President a year ago.
The guy has absolutely lost his marbles and if Congress w
Questionable survey (Score:4, Interesting)
The survey never directly says what people and demographics were surveyed, but the results strongly indicate that the demographics were nowhere near representative of the nation. Since the sponsoring center is located in Mississippi, perhaps the survey targeted people in Mississippi. That would help to explain why the top influencers are exclusively Republican and right-wing.
A further clue is the [1]chart [newslab.org] showing breakdowns by 2024 presidential vote cast. That chart shows a suspiciously huge number of voters for voted for someone other than Trump or Harris.
[1] https://newslab.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/traditional_media_by_vote_stacked_desc-2048x1766-1.png
The 6th estate? (Score:1)
Dog help us if random YouTubers are taking over for traditional news media.
On the other hand, what used to be a fairly solid traditional journalistic foundation - those of you old enough to remember Cronkite know what I'm talking about - long ago started giving way to sensationalism. With the advent of Faux News, what used to be serious journalism devolved into the pre-internet equivalent of clickbait. The sad end of 60 Minutes' credibility at the hands of genocide-supporting Bari Weiss sealed the deal: rel
Nothing to see here, move along (Score:1)
So, we're trading some folks who work for a newspaper for some other folks who post online. Who's to say the newspaper is any more or less factual than the other media.
Re: Nothing to see here, move along (Score:1)
None of it is accurate unless the writer's job/life/whatever depends on it. And even then accuracy comes in shades at best.
I've seen fundamental errors of fact slip into legal proceedings. They weren't material to the argument, just context, in the instance I saw. And it wasnâ(TM)t worth anyone's time to try to get it fixed. But it was probably the only official record of that backgrounf context that was ever going to be made. And it was factually wrong.
Reality is either experienced directly or read ab
NPR is still going (Score:1)
I watch NPR nightly news on YouTube M-F. They cut out Sat and Sun. Classically objective.
Re: NPR is still going (Score:1)
It's pbs, not npr. I blame millionaires and billionaires for swapping those letters around right under your nose.
I think I took this poll (Score:2)
...or possibly just one like it. It excluded concepts such as news aggregators. I get my news online, and most of it comes from established media, but I'm not following any particular site. I go through news aggregators such as Google News, and I can count on the hot stuff to be repeated on Reddit ad nauseum.
Whether aggregators were deliberately excluded from the poll is unclear. They could just be clueless.
Idiocracy (Score:2)
I respect many of those comedians for their satire, but not getting news from newspapers is a recipie for idiocracy.
Re: (Score:2)
In other news, Americans are getting dumber.
Re: Idiocracy (Score:2)
On balance, it would appear to be the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Ow my balls!
Re: Idiocracy (Score:2)
It's got electrolytes
Re: (Score:2)
I think, on the whole, it was better. What you printed was what you printed, and what every customer would have in their hands for as long as they preferred. In a sense, every customer was a potential archivist. It is self evident why the whole thing was not going to compete with the internet, but the thing was, even a junk paper was something you could have, clip, and refer to. Which is exactly what everyone did, all the time. The problems of the news media were and are the problems of the news media, but
Re: (Score:1)
> I respect many of those comedians for their satire, but not getting news from newspapers is a recipie for idiocracy.
And why exactly are we to assume "newspapers" will somehow be automatically less corrupt than the (often-owned-by) media companies provably so? Especially when many are digital-only distribution, able to be edited on-the-Wiki-fly? Most of the larger newspapers in America were founded more than a century ago. It would be interesting to bring a fact-checker back from that time to validate where newspaper integrity is today.
I'm supposed to believe the LA Times would be unbiased and accurate when reporting a
Re:Idiocracy (Score:4)
Have you read a newspaper lately? The coverage and quality isn't what it used to be. I subscribe to two, and donate to a nonprofit newsroom; the latter and one of the subscriptions are local and the other is a "highly regarded" national paper. I can't read the last one after dinner as it is just too depressing. Across the board though, there isn't much real national coverage of things that might anger Trump.
So I switch to Colbert for my evening news capsule. There is enough humor to make up for just how deeply troubling some things are. No, it isn't a primary source of information but it can be a nice way to expose yourself to the pollitics without getting too stressed.
Re: (Score:2)
For trump II I can barely stand to look at the news. I agree with you, the only way I can belly it is to watch usually Kimmel. Makes it so at least I don't cry about the destruction of my country.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. We should all get our information from news outlets owned by billionaire oligarchs.
Re: (Score:2)
"Journalism" nowadays is just a bunch of biased people that spend the whole day on twitter instead of doing actual investigations and fact check.
So, people just go for the same thing but funny
Re: (Score:2)
You can think what you like about comedians, but humor is always a good thing and the ability to poke fun at everyone (left and right) brings more balance to the news than a lot of news sources out there.
Humor is very much missing from public discourse these days, especially among the current crop of right-wing politicians. I judge a person on their sense of humor. The ability to not take one's self so seriously is as important as the ability to think critically. A genuine warmth of character. I remember