Mainstream media outlets are attempting a calculated image rehabilitation. The strategy appears straightforward: if you can't compete with independent creators and emerging platforms, adopt their aesthetic and language.
But manufactured authenticity doesn't translate to credibility.
Long-time observers won't forget the years of dismissive coverage, the condescending narratives, the institutional finger-pointing at emerging technologies and communities.
People remember. The internet remembers.
This rebranding exercise reveals a deeper challenge: trust, once fractured, requires far more than a style pivot to rebuild.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
13 Likes
Reward
13
2
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
On-ChainDiver
· 01-01 07:49
Basically, it's just a mask trick—changing clothes and tweaking wording to try to deceive? That's laughable. We're not suffering from amnesia.
View OriginalReply0
MetaMisery
· 01-01 07:40
Swore at it, but it's still the same old thing under a different skin.
Mainstream media outlets are attempting a calculated image rehabilitation. The strategy appears straightforward: if you can't compete with independent creators and emerging platforms, adopt their aesthetic and language.
But manufactured authenticity doesn't translate to credibility.
Long-time observers won't forget the years of dismissive coverage, the condescending narratives, the institutional finger-pointing at emerging technologies and communities.
People remember. The internet remembers.
This rebranding exercise reveals a deeper challenge: trust, once fractured, requires far more than a style pivot to rebuild.