• BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Functionally? There’s no difference, other than it’s a paid subscription channel. Practically, politically, and civically, network television has long accepted that it doesn’t make a profit from its news programming, so there’s a much stronger incentive to be calm, non-sensationalist, and to focus on important things that people care about. The only thing CNN cares about is ratings and profits.

    • scottywh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      CNN is free to stream these days without a cable subscription in the US.

      I do it on Roku pretty often.

    • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      network television has long accepted that it doesn’t make a profit from its news programming

      WDYM? They’re all making money through sponsorships. Even PBS Newshour has sponsors for their segments.

      • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        They all help pay for their programming with advertising, definitely, but the networks’ motive isn’t to achieve the highest possible profits with their news productions, because news is just one part of their lineup. It would never be profitable on its own for them. CNN is only news, so their programming naturally ends up being more friendly to corporations and other interests that might benefit their bottom line, but not necessarily the public good.