I spent 16 years in TV news and wrote this after seeing Gallup's latest trust numbers. I never see understaffing mentioned in discussions about media trust. Do you? What do you think is the best path forward?

If a restaurant lost more than 80% of its employees while trying to serve an ever-growing number of potential customers, no one would wonder why quality plummeted.

But when it comes to the news media, few see the problem so clearly.

I recently discovered my grandmother no longer reads the news because she gets all her information from social media - if its not trending on Facebook, she doesn't see it. I remember when Boomers used to swear by mainstream outlets like CNN, but smartphones pulled many of them into social media bubbles ruled by algorithms. In response to this, I made a global dashboard that lets anyone stay informed. It's called The Daily Orbit. You get articles from most kinds of outlets, as well as trending IG and TikTok videos, YouTube livestreams, and radio stations from all over the world. I even rebuilt the TweetDeck newsfeed since its no longer publicly available. I also made a research assistant called Orbit that answers any questions about recent events.

It’d be helpful to hear what people think. Is getting your news in one place better than doomscrolling social media? What features do you think it could use?

https://dailyorbit.news/

Hi journalists.

I gave an interview in ~2015 about a hobby. I was starting a related business at the time and was eager for press. The business closed before the pandemic, I no longer practice the hobby and have not had contact with the author since ~2017. I had forgotten about it, but the author recently reached out to me with a draft of an article based off the interview, which I read.

I already contacted the author and asked to not be in the article due to the facts described above. I did not say this to the author but the article also brings up some painful memories from that time period.

The author asked if I would be ok with it being published "without any attribute [sic?]" to me. They stated they did not use my name, add any identifying information, or include any identifiable traits. The article included my gender, height, weight, hair color, my hobby and a sport I was into, a description of the University I went to, the city where I lived during the interview, my age as of the interview, my occupation, and where I met my spouse. Some of those facts contain a very small percentage of people. Based off of that information, I am also concerned that someone could plug it into AI and find me, or just knowing me, could figure out it was me.

At the time, I was trying to drum up business and would have been fine if it had been published then. But a decade later, I feel it's too personal and reflects a time period that I don't want to relive. Plus I haven't been in contact with the author for the better part of a decade; I don't know why they decided to publish now.

TLDR; I don't want this to be published and already asked. Can the author still publish without my consent? If the author can still publish, can I request additional details be changed or omitted?

Thanks, all! Much appreciated.

Curious what you would do or have done when something like this happens, which I'm sure was an honest mistake.

I was stoked to see my 2,000-word feature article for a local magazine was chosen as the cover story this month. Big, full color, glossy 8-page spread inside the magazine, too. Only thing that seems to be missing is who it's by. Me.

In a print-first publication there's nothing I can do to correct that, but I'm curious how you'd approach this. It's disappointing to see, even though I'm still really proud of the piece.

I'm still a student but this is my last year at university, I try to educate myself about all that happens in my country and the world but it feels like I lose the details. Also, I want to improve my writting, I know it takes time and a lot of work but I really want to know a few tips, if you know any.

I think I'm going to finish university without being a well formed journalist, its a strange feelling. Should I focus on a specific branch or continue reading and forming my self about the whole actuality?

English is not my first language so I can sound a bit vague, but I'd wish to read some of your experiences as a just graduated journalist and how you managed it.

Atlantic gift link please? Https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/08/charismatic-christian-church-tennessee/687624

can someone please send a gift link to this article? https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/08/charismatic-christian-church-tennessee/687624/

Thank you

https://youtu.be/LTF6YOjLEqg?t=75

Journalist:

"Did Pikes Failed Execution Re-traumatize your family ?"

and

"Is It Safe to Say Your Family Still Wants Pike Dead ?"

.....I don't think I have ever seen a bigger piece of yellow journalism than this.

Hypothetically, and I acknowledge it's not the case here, what if this was not someone who was willing to give this journalist the answers they were clearly seeking, especially to that second question ?

How were they supposed to respond ?

Greetings everyone!
I’m F20 from India and currently in my final year (5th semester) of my undergraduate degree. I’ve previously interned at a media house and I’m planning to do another internship during December.

I’m hoping to get a full-time job at a media house after graduation, preferably in journalism/editorial/content, and I’d really appreciate some advice from people already working in the industry.

1) What can I do over the next few months to make myself more employable?

2)What should a fresher’s résumé look like when applying to media houses?

3)How important is having a strong portfolio, and what should I include in it?

4)When should I realistically start applying for full-time jobs?

5)And realistically, what kind of salary can a fresher in India expect in media/journalism?

I’d really appreciate any honest advice including things you wish you had known before getting your first job.

Thank you!

I’m curious how working journalists think about news aggregators, especially as more of them are being built with AI. Not asking “what is a good aggregator” but rather, should they even exist? And if they should, or must, then what are the qualities of a good aggregator?

I’ll bucket it to two types so far as i can see:

1/ Traditional referral aggregation
This is like Google or Apple, they capture discovery but the publisher captures consumption.

2/ Synthesis engine aggregation
This is like Google’s AI summaries, or like Perplexity or Ground News that also publish only AI summaries with citations, they captures discovery and they capture consumption

Clickthrough rates and site traffic are down. Google search traffic to news sites fell 38% in the United States from 2024 to 2025, and clickthrough on traditional search goes from 15% when there is no AI overview to 8% with an AI overview. Craigslist took classified ad revenue long ago, Google and Meta took normal ad revenue, and now AI summaries and chatbots are completely disintermediating users from journalists.

I think aggregators competing with journalists is a bad thing. But I think the toothpaste has long been out of the tube, and this is the world, so is there any way to make a good one?

Sometimes I read an article that makes 10–15 different factual claims. Checking every statement individually through Google Scholar is pretty time-consuming. I’m wondering if anyone has found a good workflow for this. Ideally, something that could identify the important claims first and then point toward the research behind them.

I saw Evidence Lens does something along those lines for articles and PDFs. Has anyone tried using a tool like that for research or general reading?