<p><span data-ke-size="size18">  Recently, there has been growing concerns in South Korea about journalism : The use of inflammatory photos and videos in articles. Many experts point out that this could lead to toxic journalism, but reality is far from what it should be. The reason that reporters are vulnerable to temptation of using provoking images is clear. They bring money. And this illustrates one of the biggest problems facing Korean media. Korean online platforms, such as Naver and Kakao, exercise great influence over the media, which makes them susceptible to the platforms. Most readers consume news online through Naver and Kakao, leading to the conclusion that Korean media heavily rely on them. Why would this be a problem? This highlights the fact that the media's revenue comes from click-based business models. And the models lead reporters to find and use more provoking images, which is important in click-based businesses. When headlines and images draw attention from the general public, for better or worse, the media's revenue increases.</span></p><p> </p><p><span data-ke-size="size18"> There is no doubt that this business model cause harm to journalism ethics, leading reporters to find more provoking images. How can we solve this problem? The NewYork Times could be a case in point. Recently, the number of the company's subscribers has reached to 10 miliion, which is a remarkable achievement. Instead of being obssessed with finding inappropriate images for the articles, the company's reporters can soley focus on good journalism. This is possible because The NYT has established a business model, which is absolutely free from a click-based one. During the Covid pandemic, The NYT won another Pulitzer award for its super journalism. Reporters working for the medium only pursue facts and journalism ethics, irrespective of inflammatory headlines and images, thanks to the company's well-established business model based on subscribers.</span></p><p> </p><p><span data-ke-size="size18"> We should learn lessons from this case. The current Korean media's business model is toxic and unsustainable. Most important, it discourages good journalism. Things should change. As we can see in The NewYork Times' case, superb journalism can be achieved when a company doesn't need to seek revenue not from clicking, but from subscribers who are ready to pay for good articles. Once this model settles in, it works itself. Good articles bring more subscribers, and this means more stable financial status for a company, allowing reporters to pursue what really matters, instead of seeking something that people might click. Journalism will face dire consequences if Korean media fail to solve the problem. The media should draw lessons from what The NYT hsas achieved.</span></p>
<!-- -->
1문단에 "And this illustrates one of the biggest problems facing Korean media. Korean online platforms, such as Naver and Kakao, exercise great influence over the media, which makes them susceptible to the platforms." -> 이 부분이 추상적으로 읽혀서, 클릭 조회수 내용을 여기에 바로 소개하는 것도 괜찮을 것 같아요. 플랫폼들이 어떻게 influence 하는지 바로 설명이 되면 좋을 것 같다는 생각입니다.
2문단 "can cause harm to journalism ethics" -> "can harm journalism ethics" 로 줄여서 써도 괜찮을 것 같아요.
첫댓글 잘 읽었습니다!
1문단에 "And this illustrates one of the biggest problems facing Korean media. Korean online platforms, such as Naver and Kakao, exercise great influence over the media, which makes them susceptible to the platforms." -> 이 부분이 추상적으로 읽혀서, 클릭 조회수 내용을 여기에 바로 소개하는 것도 괜찮을 것 같아요. 플랫폼들이 어떻게 influence 하는지 바로 설명이 되면 좋을 것 같다는 생각입니다.
2문단 "can cause harm to journalism ethics" -> "can harm journalism ethics" 로 줄여서 써도 괜찮을 것 같아요.
잘 읽었습니다! 해결방안을 뉴욕타임즈를 예로 들어서 잘 연결해주신 거 같아요. 저도 마찬가지로 1문단에 비슷한 내용의 문장은 생략해도 될 것 같아요