The argument, in a nutshell: "journalists deserve low pay. Wages are compensation for value creation. And journalists simply aren't creating much value these days." Now while I'm inclined to agree with the proposition, it nonetheless commits a common fallacy - that of associating payment with value. What something costs is not a function of value, it is a function of willingness to pay. Often, this may seem to be associated with value, but when you look at the prices scalpers can command for scarce tickets, or hospitals can demand for minor treatments of a person who is gravely ill, you can see that ability to control the marketplace counts for much more than the value of the good. Journalists have lost control of the marketplace. The work they do is being replicated (better) by people willing to do it for free. And that is why the bottom is dropping out of the market. (The same logic exists in education as well, so there`s no point defending the cost of an education based on its value.)
Today: 0 Total: 89 [Direct link] [Share]
