Zanimiv članek v NYT o tednu namernega ignoriranja vseh medijskih vsebin o Donaldu Trumpu ali v zvezi z njim.

My point: I wanted to see what I could learn about the modern news media by looking at how thoroughly Mr. Trump had subsumed it. In one way, my experiment failed: I could find almost no Trump-free part of the press.
But as the week wore on, I discovered several truths about our digital media ecosystem. Coverage of Mr. Trump may eclipse that of any single human being ever. The reasons have as much to do with him as the way social media amplifies every big story until it swallows the world. And as important as covering the president may be, I began to wonder if we were overdosing on Trump news, to the exclusion of everything else.
...
In January, Mr. Trump broke mediaQuant’s records. In a single month, he received $817 million in coverage, higher than any single person has ever received in the four years that mediaQuant has been analyzing the media, according to Paul Senatori, the company’s chief analytics officer. For much of the past four years, Mr. Obama’s monthly earned media value hovered around $200 million to $500 million. The highest that Hillary Clinton got during the presidential campaign was $430 million, in July.
...
There’s no easy way out of this fix. But as big as Mr. Trump is, he’s not everything — and it’d be nice to find a way for the media ecosystem to recognize that.
www.nytimes.com/2017...gnore.html

Ampak, le zakaj bi se "medijski ekosistem" obrzdal, če pa mu Trump menda zagotavlja rast gledanosti in branosti, več naročnikov in najbrž tudi denarja od oglaševalcev? Ali z drugimi besedami, kako slabe novice postanejo dobre novice. :-)

Privatno kupljive Finance Lajv in državno neomajna sta.si sta še zmeraj zmagovita medijska kombinacija. Danes zjutraj so objavili tole lucidno vest:

Avstralski nacionalni letalski prevoznik Qantas je v prvi polovici poslovnega leta, ki se je za podjetje končalo 31. decembra, zabeležil 852 milijonov avstralskih dolarjev (621,5 milijona evrov) dobička pred davki, kar je 7,5 odstotka manj kot v polletnem obdobju prej. V podjetju padec pripisujejo predvsem nizkim cenam nafte in večji konkurenci.
live.finance.si/3371...ek-Qantasa
www.sta.si/2359267/n...ek-qantasa

Trditev, da je imela letalska družba manj dobička zaradi cenejšega goriva je seveda nelogična, ampak v Moji Deželi očitno vse začuti LOVE in dobi povsem nove pomene in konotacije in interpretacije. Za vsak slučaj sem preveril, kaj so o tem poročali pri samem Qantasu, pri neki provincialni agenciji Reuters in neki majhni avstralski medijski hiši ABC.

Vsi našteti se seveda ne morejo meriti z veličino in pronicljivostjo sta.si in Finance Lajv, kar je najbrž razlog, da Reuters in ABC pri poročanju o polletnih poslovnih rezultatih Quantasa sploh nista omenila cene goriva.
www.reuters.com/arti...SL4N1G528D
www.abc.net.au/news/...ts/8295650

Res pa je cene goriva v svoji izjavi omenil šef Qantasa in to dobesedno takole:

In the international market, conditions are challenging.
As travellers are very much aware, cheaper oil has led to strong capacity growth on international routes – pushing fares down and impacting all major airlines.
Qantas International isn’t immune from that impact.
And not surprisingly, its profit is down on last year’s record levels.
www.qantasnewsroom.c...uary-2017/

Zdaj vem, da so za vse težave letalskih prevoznikov vedno krive cene nafte. Če so visoke, ni dobro, če so nizke, je slabo. Potemtakem ni nič čudnega, da je šla Adria po gobe oziroma z davkoplačevalsko doto v kremplje nekega anonimnega nemškega sklada. Tako se svet vrti po interpretacijah sta.si via Finance Lajv.