adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Media

As newsrooms grapple with shifting media landscape, most Canadians oppose government intervention

Published

 on


As newsrooms grapple with shifting media landscape, most Canadians oppose government intervention

Consolidation also opposed as daily print readership evaporates as news consumption moves online


July 13, 2023 – The top story of Canadian news in recent years is one of decline – falling revenues, shrinking work forces of journalists, and fewer readers, watchers and listeners.

This has left Canada’s media companies looking for answers. New data from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute has Canadians ruling out at least two proposed solutions. A majority (59%) oppose the government funding of private newsrooms, believing it “compromises journalistic independence”. A similar proportion (57%) say the consolidation of media – such as the recently considered but ultimately rejected coming together of Torstar and Postmedia – should be discouraged “so there is more competition in news coverage in Canada”. In opposition are minorities who say “consolidation is necessary for the survival of newspapers” (20%) and “the government needs to fund newsrooms because of the importance of journalism” (19%).

What remains is uncertain – though earlier released ARI data found Canadians in support of the goal of Bill C-18 to funnel money from the “Big Tech” duo of Meta and Google to newsrooms if not the means. However, there is no stop to the seismic shift to the media consumption landscape happening under newsrooms’ feet. Even as recently as 2016, two-in-five (42%) Canadians said they read a print publication daily for their news. Now that figure has halved (19%). Television (71% to 52%) and radio news (57% to 45%) have also declined in prominence, though they remain important sources of information for majorities of Canadians over the age of 54. In their place, nearly all (89%) Canadians turn to the internet for news, leaving newsrooms to compete in a crowded advertising dollar ecosystem dominated by the two Big Tech apex predators.

More Key Findings:

  • Though the government funding of private newsrooms is unpopular among Canadians, half (47%) disagree the federal government should completely defund CBC. One-third (36%) want to see CBC’s funding cut off, including approaching three-quarters (72%) of past CPC voters.
  • Fewer than one-in-five (17%) supported the now-dead merger between Torstar and Postmedia. Nearly as many were opposed (43%) as uncertain (40%, see detailed tables).
  • Three-quarters (74%) of Canadians over the age of 54 say they turn on the TV daily for their news. One-quarter (26%) of 18- to 34-year-olds say the same. In fact, as many of the youngest Canadian adults (28%) say they get news from podcasts on a typical day.

About ARI

The Angus Reid Institute (ARI) was founded in October 2014 by pollster and sociologist, Dr. Angus Reid. ARI is a national, not-for-profit, non-partisan public opinion research foundation established to advance education by commissioning, conducting and disseminating to the public accessible and impartial statistical data, research and policy analysis on economics, political science, philanthropy, public administration, domestic and international affairs and other socio-economic issues of importance to Canada and its world.

INDEX

Part One: Readership and consolidation

  • Print readership has declined as media consumption moves to internet

  • Most want media consolidation to be discouraged to keep news coverage diverse

Part Two: The government’s role in news industry

  • Majority oppose the government funding private newsrooms

  • Canadians more likely to oppose than support government defunding CBC

Part One: Readership and consolidation

Print readership has declined as media consumption moves to internet

As internet-based news options – including podcasts, aggregators, and social media platforms – continue to permeate and saturate Canadians’ media consumption habits, the role of print publications has moved from a place of prominence to an afterthought. Asked how they gather news and information on any given day, just one-in-five Canadians (19%) say that they utilize a print source, a proportion that has halved over the past seven years and continues a steady downward trend. The number of Canadian adults using online editions and other internet sources has risen 12 points over that same period, while television and radio have also diminished:

While there are important generational differences in terms of Canadians’ news consumption, print tops out at just 25 per cent utilization among those 65 years of age and older. Young people rely almost solely on the internet, while television news is a key source of information for those over the age of 54:

Most want media consolidation to be discouraged to keep news coverage diverse

With local papers and media organizations struggling to maintain advertising and fund journalistic endeavours, consolidation of newsrooms has emerged as a solution for many media companies. Large organizations including Rogers, Bell, Corus, and Quebecor Inc., own a vast network of websites, radio stations, and papers in Canada which tends to improve prospects for advertisers, but increase challenges for high-quality local journalism.

If Canadians had to choose, more, non-integrated news would be their choice. Close to three-in-five (57%) say that consolidation should be discouraged, while one-in-five (20%) say that consolidation is needed in order to keep newspapers afloat. Notably, as it stands, fewer than one-in-six (15%) Canadians said they currently pay for an online news subscription in data released by ARI earlier this week.

In a relatively rare moment of cross-partisan agreement, at least 58 per cent of those who supported each of the major federal parties in 2021 say that they would discourage consolidation:

One extremely high-profile example of consolidation fell through this week, when it was announced that talks between Torstar and Postmedia had broken off. This anticipated merger was opposed by 43 per cent of Canadians and supported by 17 per cent, with a large contingent of Canadians uncertain whether this would be a good or a bad thing (see detailed tables).

Part Two: The government’s role in news industry

The federal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has taken several steps to help the ailing journalism industry in Canada. The government announced a near $600-million support package in 2018 which includes financial assistance for print magazines, non-daily newspapers and digital periodicals, and tax credits on wages paid to newsroom employees, and for Canadians who subscribe to digital news. It also passed Bill C-18 in an attempt to push the “Big Tech” companies to compensate Canadian news companies for their content linked on sites such as Google News and Facebook. As those two websites have responded by announcing they will block Canadian news content when the law is officially enacted, it remains to be seen what effect Bill C-18 will have on the Canadian news environment.

Overall, the situation is still dire for newsrooms in the country. This year alone Bell laid off 1,300 employees including top journalists at CTV National News. Meanwhile Postmedia, the parent company of dailies including the Vancouver Sun, Calgary Herald, Montreal Gazette, Ottawa Citizen, Toronto Sun and the National Post, laid off 11 per cent of its editorial staff earlier this year.

Canada’s situation lands in the middle of a broader discussion as to what the government’s role in media should be. Some argue that journalism is a public good, and given the economic threat it faces from the shifting landscape, it should receive public financing to ensure there is trustworthy journalism available. Others worry that any amount of government funding of journalism causes the perception, at least, or, worse, the possibility, of conflict of interest in the media reporting on the government that funds it.

Majority oppose the government funding private newsrooms

Canadians are more likely to believe the latter. Approaching three-in-five (59%) say the “government should not fund newsrooms because it compromises journalistic independence”. One-in-five (19%) disagree, and believe governments need to fund newsrooms “because of the importance of journalism”.

Past CPC voters are the most likely to oppose government funding of newsrooms at more than four-in-five (83%). However, pluralities of those who voted Liberal (48%) and NDP (38%) in 2021 agree:

Canadians more likely to oppose than support government defunding CBC

The most prominent example of a government-funded newsroom in Canada is the CBC, which received $1.24 billion in government funding in 2022. It also generates revenue from advertising and subscriptions to the amount of $651.4 million last year. However, when the CBC’s own journalistic independence was questioned during a spat with Twitter over being labelled government-funded media earlier this year, CBC noted that its “editorial independence is protected by law”.

Canadians are more likely to oppose (47%) than support (36%) completely defunding Canada’s national public broadcaster.

There is a sharp political division on this matter. Approaching three-quarters (72%) of past CPC voters believe the government should defund the CBC. Most of those who voted Liberal (68%) and NDP (69%) in 2021 are opposed:

Journalism, of course, is not the only thing offered by the CBC, which also broadcasts entertainment and sports programming.

Perhaps in recognition of CBC’s broad mandate, while many who believe the government should not be funding newsrooms want the federal government to defund CBC (52%), approaching two-in-five (37%) disagree:

Survey Methodology:

The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from July 4-6, 2023 among a representative randomized sample of 1,610 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI.

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Trump could cash out his DJT stock within weeks. Here’s what happens if he sells

Published

 on

Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.

Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.

Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.

Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.

Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.

Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.

As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Arizona man accused of social media threats to Trump is arrested

Published

 on

Cochise County, AZ — Law enforcement officials in Arizona have apprehended Ronald Lee Syvrud, a 66-year-old resident of Cochise County, after a manhunt was launched following alleged death threats he made against former President Donald Trump. The threats reportedly surfaced in social media posts over the past two weeks, as Trump visited the US-Mexico border in Cochise County on Thursday.

Syvrud, who hails from Benson, Arizona, located about 50 miles southeast of Tucson, was captured by the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday afternoon. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed his arrest, stating, “This subject has been taken into custody without incident.”

In addition to the alleged threats against Trump, Syvrud is wanted for multiple offences, including failure to register as a sex offender. He also faces several warrants in both Wisconsin and Arizona, including charges for driving under the influence and a felony hit-and-run.

The timing of the arrest coincided with Trump’s visit to Cochise County, where he toured the US-Mexico border. During his visit, Trump addressed the ongoing border issues and criticized his political rival, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, for what he described as lax immigration policies. When asked by reporters about the ongoing manhunt for Syvrud, Trump responded, “No, I have not heard that, but I am not that surprised and the reason is because I want to do things that are very bad for the bad guys.”

This incident marks the latest in a series of threats against political figures during the current election cycle. Just earlier this month, a 66-year-old Virginia man was arrested on suspicion of making death threats against Vice President Kamala Harris and other public officials.

Continue Reading

Media

Trump Media & Technology Group Faces Declining Stock Amid Financial Struggles and Increased Competition

Published

 on

Tech News in Canada

Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock has taken a significant hit, dropping more than 11% this week following a disappointing earnings report and the return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the rival social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. This decline is part of a broader downward trend for the parent company of Truth Social, with the stock plummeting nearly 43% since mid-July. Despite the sharp decline, some investors remain unfazed, expressing continued optimism for the company’s financial future or standing by their investment as a show of political support for Trump.

One such investor, Todd Schlanger, an interior designer from West Palm Beach, explained his commitment to the stock, stating, “I’m a Republican, so I supported him. When I found out about the stock, I got involved because I support the company and believe in free speech.” Schlanger, who owns around 1,000 shares, is a regular user of Truth Social and is excited about the company’s future, particularly its plans to expand its streaming services. He believes Truth Social has the potential to be as strong as Facebook or X, despite the stock’s recent struggles.

However, Truth Social’s stock performance is deeply tied to Trump’s political influence and the company’s ability to generate sustainable revenue, which has proven challenging. An earnings report released last Friday showed the company lost over $16 million in the three-month period ending in June. Revenue dropped by 30%, down to approximately $836,000 compared to $1.2 million during the same period last year.

In response to the earnings report, Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes emphasized the company’s strong cash position, highlighting $344 million in cash reserves and no debt. He also reiterated the company’s commitment to free speech, stating, “From the beginning, it was our intention to make Truth Social an impenetrable beachhead of free speech, and by taking extraordinary steps to minimize our reliance on Big Tech, that is exactly what we are doing.”

Despite these assurances, investors reacted negatively to the quarterly report, leading to a steep drop in stock price. The situation was further complicated by Trump’s return to X, where he posted for the first time in a year. Trump’s exclusivity agreement with Trump Media & Technology Group mandates that he posts personal content first on Truth Social. However, he is allowed to make politically related posts on other social media platforms, which he did earlier this week, potentially drawing users away from Truth Social.

For investors like Teri Lynn Roberson, who purchased shares near the company’s peak after it went public in March, the decline in stock value has been disheartening. However, Roberson remains unbothered by the poor performance, saying her investment was more about supporting Trump than making money. “I’m way at a loss, but I am OK with that. I am just watching it for fun,” Roberson said, adding that she sees Trump’s return to X as a positive move that could expand his reach beyond Truth Social’s “echo chamber.”

The stock’s performance holds significant financial implications for Trump himself, as he owns a 65% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group. According to Fortune, this stake represents a substantial portion of his net worth, which could be vulnerable if the company continues to struggle financially.

Analysts have described Truth Social as a “meme stock,” similar to companies like GameStop and AMC that saw their stock prices driven by ideological investments rather than business fundamentals. Tyler Richey, an analyst at Sevens Report Research, noted that the stock has ebbed and flowed based on sentiment toward Trump. He pointed out that the recent decline coincided with the rise of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, which may have dampened perceptions of Trump’s 2024 election prospects.

Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, offered a grim long-term outlook for Truth Social, suggesting that the stock would likely remain volatile, but with an overall downward trend. “What’s lacking for the true believer in the company story is, ‘OK, where is the business strategy that will be generating revenue?'” Ritter said, highlighting the company’s struggle to produce a sustainable business model.

Still, for some investors, like Michael Rogers, a masonry company owner in North Carolina, their support for Trump Media & Technology Group is unwavering. Rogers, who owns over 10,000 shares, said he invested in the company both as a show of support for Trump and because of his belief in the company’s financial future. Despite concerns about the company’s revenue challenges, Rogers expressed confidence in the business, stating, “I’m in it for the long haul.”

Not all investors are as confident. Mitchell Standley, who made a significant return on his investment earlier this year by capitalizing on the hype surrounding Trump Media’s planned merger with Digital World Acquisition Corporation, has since moved on. “It was basically just a pump and dump,” Standley told ABC News. “I knew that once they merged, all of his supporters were going to dump a bunch of money into it and buy it up.” Now, Standley is staying away from the company, citing the lack of business fundamentals as the reason for his exit.

Truth Social’s future remains uncertain as it continues to struggle with financial losses and faces stiff competition from established social media platforms. While its user base and investor sentiment are bolstered by Trump’s political following, the company’s long-term viability will depend on its ability to create a sustainable revenue stream and maintain relevance in a crowded digital landscape.

As the company seeks to stabilize, the question remains whether its appeal to Trump’s supporters can translate into financial success or whether it will remain a volatile stock driven more by ideology than business fundamentals.

Continue Reading

Trending