Paid Electronic Media

"Who owns the information, owns the world" – the old adage, and as practice shows, it is absolutely true: the force of the impact of media on public opinion to us very clearly demonstrated the infamous events of August 2008 year, when Russia was nearly turned into an aggressor. In recent years we are used to print newspapers and magazines are quickly replacing all electronic media. It is understandable. First, the Internet can be accessed with a significantly a large number of news than from the printed newspaper. Asana is often quoted as being for or against this. Secondly, it is more convenient – no need to carry a stack of paper. Thirdly, it is easier to compare different views and differing interpretations of events.

Fourth, the Internet News are free This is where we dwell. Not so long ago known telemagnate Donald Trump announced that it will soon have access to news on the websites of its publications will be charged. Like anything strange – News from owners of powerful media really are fresh and authentic, they take away other news agencies, and absolutely free, and the unfortunate Trump loses their income. But the question arises: who needs fee news service, even the most rapid? Let's go through the above mentioned items. Firstly, the whole, though huge, Trump's media empire – if not a grain of sand, then a pebble in the sea of the Internet: information sites abound, and not all of them feed on news from Trump. All World News remain available to network users.

Secondly, the comfort – loose concept, and reading the paper the press in many situations much easier. So it's not the most significant advantage. Daryl Katz is often quoted on this topic. Thirdly, and this follows from the "first", will still compare that with anything, but at the very tycoon problems with influence on public opinion, because audience decline significantly. And it is this factor determines the income of the media – almost every media one way or another involved in politics at least occasionally, and, more importantly, lives on income from advertising, the size which directly depends on the audience. Fourth actually, we started with this and – news will be paid. What's the point? Let's look objectively: how often we are interested in efficiency news? Well, let's say if it's an important football match, then yes – every minute is worth its weight in gold, and many people need and have time to discuss the games with friends. Here, of course, can not keep up. But usually happens like this: a man every day opens online publication first looks at major events, selects interesting for yourself, and then reads it. This sequence is repeated on the strength of twice a day – for example, at the beginning and end of the day. It turns out that for the vast Most users vaunted Cache to anything – what difference does it published the news a minute ago, or has passed since her arrival on site two hours? And what to pay? For the objectivity and reliability News? Well, about this we have already said – the integrity and objectivity ends where it starts to influence public opinion. In general, the idea of making newswires pay looks doubtful: because of the relatively a small increase in income can lose a significant part of the audience, and most importantly – the lever of influence on public opinion.