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 tech and platform firms are rapidly losing the Silicon Valley naiveté that has characterized their activities in the past 20 years. Billions of dollars of fines and lawsuit losses for abuse of dominant positions, misuse of personal data, workplace harassment, securities violations and a host of other offenses are shaking their world. Company leaders appear aghast and paralyzed by the developments, often unable to comprehend and effectively adjust to the forces of regulation and litigation that are acting on them globally, but especially in Europe and North America. A good part of their bewilderment is due to blind spots in their perceptions of themselves and the place of digital firms in society.   For two decades their founders, the companies themselves and digital gatherings and conventions have repeated the mantra that they are revolutionary, different, and old rules don’t apply.   They have argued that digital tech frees users and firms from the constraints of national regu

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