why the DM, and others have started using MN and reddit threads for articles?

[Jupiter2Mars]

Is it less about lazy journalism and more about the reality of life running a newspaper business these days? i.e. people demand instant information, and a huge range of stories but very few are willing to actually pay for it?

What is news?

I would have thought that there are other stories out there that are newsworthy. What people say on Mumsnet is not news. It's clickbait, generates revenue but it's not news.

'Started'? It's been going on for ages.

Because they can?

Weren't you on the 345 threads about this last week OP?

No, I wasn't. I didn't see any of them tbh, or else I wouldn't have started this one. Has ti all been said already, then?

At least one of the most recent ones was so obviously made up for hilarious guffaws and a place in classics if that consoles anyone.

Currently there are at least 2 or 3 threads a week about the unfairness of it all mainly.

I agree with MN hardly being news. But I'd say the same about whatever LittleMix says in another bland interview, or which TOWIE star is displaying her body in a bikini this week. Yet, all of them make it into most of the newspapers.

Here's yesterday's thread...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2786036-Three-threads-on-the-daily-mail-website-today

It's been going on for ages now.

You've got to wonder what news there was in the online papers before they borrowed from social media.

It's all click bait.

But then again, lots of news items get on MN and MN gets clicks from people.

we are clearly absolutely fascinating

It's the modern freakshow

Well not really. But it's something that people just have to read. Online newspapers seem to have forgotten their role is to present news and are just after stories that generate clicks.

I'm a journalist and the answer is that people find those articles interesting. They'll click on them. People love stories about what other people think.

The threads that the DM post are usually controversial in some way. Again, people love that.

I would also argue it's not the journalist being "lazy". It's the journalist responding to demands for multiple stories a week from the editor. They may even be told to look on public websites.

I'm a jounralist too. I think it's because the big news outlets have made so many people redundant in recent years, they no longer pay people to do "real" journalism - i.e going out and investigating a story and spending time on it,. checking it for libel, fact-checking it - they just want stuff that is churned out as quickly as possible.

It's part of the post-fact era

*Online newspapers seem to have forgotten their role is to present news.
*
No, their role is to make money for their greedy bosses.

And most of the big name online news sites report news first and foremost.

Disclaimer: have never produced a story about Mumsnet and I don't work for the Daily Mail

YY to what Stokey said.

I love investigative journalism, but it takes weeks months. The money is not there anymore.