Credible journalism combats social pollution

Have you ever thought about why you watch or read certain things online? What catches your attention? What diverts it? When do you connect and disconnect from content? And why?

These questions are related to one of the most precious assets of our era – time. Technology may be rapidly advancing, but the number of hours in a day remains unchanged. So, it is logical that this most precious of resources is spent on something that positively transforms your life and society in general.

Reflections such as these are crucial when it comes to deciding how we want to live. It is not just the separation between truth and lies and reality and fantasy that will define the rest of our century, but what they mean in practical terms, such as the choice between democracies and autocracies, populism and sincerity, and stability and social disharmony.

While the press is not the solution to all modern dilemmas, try to imagine a world without it. How would you differentiate between facts and rumours? Without credible and independent journalistic coverage, how will we know what news sources to trust? Who would report the emergence of a new cyber scam in which people lose their savings? Who would investigate corruption? Who would address the ills of big tech and the risks that social networks pose to emotional, political, and economic stability? Finally, who would expose the power of corrupt autocrats and their threat to democracies?

How to properly use your time when accessing information should be a question that we constantly ask ourselves, either to avoid falling into the trap of over-engaging on technological platforms or wasting our time wading through mountains of useless information.

However, it is not only the pitfalls of online engagement that we need to ponder, but the threats facing the journalism industry.

Producers of independent journalism face sustainability challenges. With a few exceptions, the majority of serious media organisations are under threat because of the regulatory asymmetry of technology platforms. Because they are based on trust, media organisations must maintain their ethics and accuracy, while big tech is not strictly regulated in this regard.

An analogy can be made between the phenomenon of big tech and global warming. As a side effect of their business models, large platforms produce social pollution that threatens mental health and the stability of the planet.

It is only fair, therefore, that these platforms pay a ‘support fee’ for professional journalism, which cleans up much of this social pollution. The logic is simple: Whoever makes the ecosystem dirty must pay at least part of the massive profit they extract as a result to whoever cleans it.

Instead of dragging us down with the false beliefs and scams created by people who took advantage of the loopholes opened up by the world of algorithms, big tech could make a significant contribution to the future by financing diverse, robust, and independent journalism. This could help prevent humanity from continuing its march towards the abyss.

Marcello Rech is the president of the Brazilian Newspaper Association.

*Article edited by Caxton Local Media