Monsters of the 2010s: The Pivoters to Video

How many thousands of journalists’ lives were upended by the decisions of how many handfuls of people?

Chris Hughes (left) and Mark ZuckerbergJohn Green/San Mateo County Times/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The staff of Mother Jones is rounding up the decade’s heroes and monsters. Find them all here.

If there was one phrase that would summon dread in a newsroom in the 2010s it was “the pivot.”

I lived through a sort of pivot: I was hired as a staff writer at The New Republic in 2014. Not very long after I started, the owner at the time, Mark Zuckerberg’s college roommate, decided to transform the 100-year-old magazine into a “vertically integrated media company” that would produce “snackable content.” Many of the senior staff quit, and the staff that remained spent the next year trying to understand what “snackable content” could possibly mean. It went as well as you could expect: Chris Hughes sold the magazine about a year later.

I was surprised at the time how one person (who’d occasionally walk by my desk to talk about “his friend Mark”) could affect the lives and careers of an entire staff because he had a change of mind. I was naive. Media outlets steered by private equity firms and billionaire owners spent much of the decade chasing the whims of Silicon Valley’s algorithms. When Facebook decided it would rather host media content instead of driving an audience to it elsewhere, a video boom was born. The pivots soon followed, leading to hundreds of layoffs at Mashable, Fusion, Vice, Mic, and Vocativ (where my sister worked). Later, many outlets pivoted back when they realized video wouldn’t produce the profits they’d once imagined. The video teams they had just hired were laid off. 

And it was all pointless: A lawsuit filed by advertisers against Facebook in 2018 claimed the company had knowingly inflated its video metrics. (Facebook settled last month.) Those were the metrics that altered the media landscape, creating incentives for publishers to chase more viewers, to divert more resources to video initiatives, to disfigure their newsrooms.

In her powerful essay, “Human Toll of the 2019 Media Apocalypse,” Maya Kosoff gets to the bottom of how these decisions have hollowed out journalism. “The hedge fund managers and bosses at the top of the private-equity firms and the conglomerates that own many of the country’s newspapers are the adults in the room on paper, but when they streamline operations, lay off staffers, and downsize newsrooms while still trying to turn a profit, they fail to successfully replicate the thing that’s at the heart of any newsroom.” 

How many thousands of journalists’ lives were upended by the decisions of how many handfuls of people? How many careers were ground up because of the fictions and frauds of measuring digital audience? These are frightening, dizzying thoughts. ThinkProgress, Deadspin, Pacific Standard, The Times-Picayune, and Washington Post Express died in 2019. According to the Columbia Journalism Review‘s tally, 3,385 journalists lost their jobs in the past year alone. I know what snackable content means now. It means the journalists get eaten.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate