edithhopegardenjournal

A common argument, accepted by many for its simple narrative, is that digital news killed print news. But the reality is more complicated. Newspaper print circulation number rose until about 2005 in most Western countries, along with rising populations. That increase, however, masked the fact that household penetration began declining in the 1970s, reaching about 25-35% in those countries at the millennium. This household trend began 3 decades before the appearance of the internet news and led to advertisers to progressively reduce newspaper advertising. Advertisers were unhappy with newspapers long before the internet. The internet made it possible for many to use it capabilities for inexpensive marketing and personal marketing that cost little and took the place of print real estate, automobile, employment and other classified advertising. Internet advertising became free or low cost. The growth of internet advertising revenue never matched the amount of money leaving print because

Digital media firms have long argued against privacy regulation asserting that regulators don’t understand the ways they work, that digital firms have strong incentives to protect the privacy of users, and that the firms do so through self-regulation. Unfortunately, for years we have witnessed major digital players continually apologizing for their lapses in protecting the privacy of their customers, often violating their own policies and promises, and for not ensuring that others with whom they do business protect the privacy of the data they access and use. There has been a constant failure to put their customers’ privacy interests first and digital companies have dismissed criticism and call for regulation as misguided or perilous. The regulations that have appeared, such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), have improved transparency and the abilities to control how some of their personal information is used, but is doing little to control the ma