- Reaction score
- 8,118
- Points
- 1,360
From Canadaland, a list of (mostly smallish, local) media outlets who got some $ - good overall view of the different funds available, too.
List also attached
List also attached

Operating on assumption that the financial assistance as a whole isn’t being contested, why not support niche trade publications? They may play a very important role in a sector narrow enough that profitability is difficult, and there’s bigger bang for buck. They’re potentially also less likely to be effectively politically leveraged due to esoteric subject matter.I find it odd that some of the publications seem to be trade publications, or publications that have limited circulation by their very nature (e.g. the x3 CAA magazines and "Tactics" which is about commercial real estate). Is the intent of this fund "to have access to diverse and reliable sources of news and information" or just keep printers in business? This seem very niche, almost to the point of irrelevancy for the average Canadian.
Yep. I would much prefer publications like “Quilters’ Monthly” get government support rather than companies like Postmedia, Torstar or Black Press.Operating on assumption that the financial assistance as a whole isn’t being contested, why not support niche trade publications? They may play a very important role in a sector narrow enough that profitability is difficult, and there’s bigger bang for buck. They’re potentially also less likely to be effectively politically leveraged due to esoteric subject matter.
I don’t much care either way, but I don’t really take issue with smaller trade publications receiving support if any media are going to receive support.
Agreed, given the smaller outlets are under the post pressure given people want their news for free. There's other funds out there being pumped into Big Media, but outside of some smaller-audience specialty publications, the PDF I shared is mostly small local outlets. And the money they're pumping in looks like they'd fund a position without many benefits, some of a full-time position or some part-time hours.... If we're going to make a massive social blunder, I'd rather it at least be executed with the fig-leaf of saving small local newspapers (even around their larger owners).
You're not wrong there. So how do you help smaller newsrooms that are supposed to be doing the bulk of in-your-backyard reporting, then? Or do we settle for whatever Big Media decides to share with us, regardless of whether they cover stuff in our own backyards?Subsidizing stuff is a bottomloss hole. Inevitably: "why their useless timewasting hobbies and not my valuable productive pastime"?
Governments do a sh!tty job of choosing winners, and shouldn't try.
Major journalism has really never not been partisan. Go back to any old British newspapers, it was pretty clear which were Tory and which were Whig.Write stuff people want to pay to read. This article discusses the past and present and rise of digital subscriptions in lieu of ad-based revenue. Small newsrooms probably can't follow the same model as big media; they have to put out stuff people find interesting abou their own communities.
"What comes next for the media industry? The validation of disturbing news within certain value systems has finally become a viable business model. But this business model has stratified the press, bringing meaningful results only to large, nationally concerned media outlets. News validation creates a swarming effect: people want to have disturbing news validated by an authoritative notary with a greater followership. Audiences want to pay only for flagship media, such as the New York Times or the Washington Post. If other, smaller media outlets don’t join the chorus, they risk digital backlash; if they do join it, they struggle to differentiate themselves and lack authority to be a recognized news validator, anyway. Most subscription money flows to a few behemoths. The new subscription model has led not only to media polarization but also to media concentration.
The biggest loss, however, is the mutation of journalism into post-journalism. The death of those newspapers that shut down before this mutation was at least honorable. Journalism wanted its picture to fit the world. Post-journalism wants the world to fit its picture, which is a definition of propaganda."
Or read newspaper articles during the American Civil War. The party politics were vicious.Major journalism has really never not been partisan. Go back to any old British newspapers, it was pretty clear which were Tory and which were Whig.
I’ll bet you a few bucks that if a new media organization came along thatWrite stuff people want to pay to read. This article discusses the past and present and rise of digital subscriptions in lieu of ad-based revenue. Small newsrooms probably can't follow the same model as big media; they have to put out stuff people find interesting abou their own communities.
"What comes next for the media industry? The validation of disturbing news within certain value systems has finally become a viable business model. But this business model has stratified the press, bringing meaningful results only to large, nationally concerned media outlets. News validation creates a swarming effect: people want to have disturbing news validated by an authoritative notary with a greater followership. Audiences want to pay only for flagship media, such as the New York Times or the Washington Post. If other, smaller media outlets don’t join the chorus, they risk digital backlash; if they do join it, they struggle to differentiate themselves and lack authority to be a recognized news validator, anyway. Most subscription money flows to a few behemoths. The new subscription model has led not only to media polarization but also to media concentration.
The biggest loss, however, is the mutation of journalism into post-journalism. The death of those newspapers that shut down before this mutation was at least honorable. Journalism wanted its picture to fit the world. Post-journalism wants the world to fit its picture, which is a definition of propaganda."
Any government official that says that is immediately suspect.Interesting concept"We will continue to be your single source of truth… Unless you hear it from us it is not the truth."

