When Information become polarized and "pricy"

Reading hard quality news is privilege's nowadays. Why? Because the hardnews paper is not sold anymore, they are changing to digital now.

Before, to get information and deep article with much research and journalism can be reach by buying paper printed news or magazine. In Indonesia Tempo is one of them. It is not much pricy as many of the printing cost is paid by advertisement.

The other way, is to reach the online website of the tempo magazine, or any hard news publisher. They would give free hard news, paid by the paper user, or advertisement from paper published. 

The problem is, as the paper version is less and less printed, beacuse it was not profitable anymore as people getting into the digital version. The digital version, of the hard news, now burdened with profitability. it need to get revenue and be the profitable one.

The problem is, the difference in advertisement concept.

In paper version, advertiser willing to pay some money to get a spot in the paper printed page. And there are not many choice for advertising in paper media. So, they are willing to pay because the scarcity of the commodity.

But in digital media, that's not the case. The business advertiser could get advertised digitally via many-- many-- digital platform of existence, like google, youtube, facebook, twitter, instagram, and so on. This advertisement changing its places.

In turn this is pushed the news publisher in the corner. And made them to compete with the more broad competitor. Which of course they are losing.

What they can do now, is to back to subscription. Which made quality written news become a lot expensive than before.

And the effect, as the calculation of advertisement is paid per click. The news maker is "forced" to go to the "popular" news. With less cost of research and journalism.

That is why, many digital news is first to cover but not highly reliable (like detik com in the 2010'ish) in more and more, make the title as bombastic and attention catching as possible.

That is also explain, why the hoax is persistence and why Dewa Kipas story was helped by the media hype, with less journalism (no cover both side, no deep research on the subject), and high "emotionalism" or "sympathy" so to get as much click as possible. With less after story cover.

Even though there is always a fight between "sugar" vs "oat" news in the industry, referencing to the morning glory movie, underrated movie in my opinion. The sugar is not always face to face with the entertainment. 

So, the bad news is, the quality news would be undemocratically distributed to the paying subscriber, the one that sparring money for the journalism.

And as backward as it is, the news would become polarized and the 'right' news -- as we have bad news is a good news -- would only be burryed under the so much more 'sugar' story, which would, I'm afraid, make the society to be less better on decision making.

As said by Pramudya Ananta Toer, "be just, beginning from the mind."

There is still so much good news on this progression. For example, lets be happy, there are so much free information as free as search on google. :)