Why Journalists Demanding Newspapers Charge For News Need To Check Up On Newspaper History
from the confused-about-their-own-industry dept
Last week we wrote about David Lazarus's latest column suggesting that newspapers collude and all agree to stop putting content online. While it showed how little he understands economics, it also apparently showed how little he understands the newspaper industry. Justin Fox, over at Time Magazine, responded to Lazarus, pointing out that news has been free or close to free since well before the internet came along. It is true that most newspapers aren't supported by subscription revenue, but by advertisements already. What little subscription revenue was brought in was often more about covering the costs of printing. On the internet, you remove that cost of printing, so it shouldn't be much of a surprise that the content itself is basically free. The comments on Fox's post are also interesting, as a couple of journalists come quite close to suggesting (not in these terms exactly) that facts should be covered by copyright. They suggest, alternatively, that Google News shouldn't be able to link to newspapers and that radio announcers shouldn't be able to read the news on the air if they found the story in a newspaper. This shows not only a total cluelessness about the "ownership" of factual information, but also on the value of spreading news in pumping up the value of the original reporters themselves. Perhaps it's not surprising that some reporters don't understand the business forces impacting journalism itself (seeing as they're reporters, rather than business folks), but it's unfortunate that they seem to think that there's some sort of natural right to sustain an obsolete business model long after it's been shown to be unnecessary. There are plenty of business models out there to support journalism. There is tremendous demand for real journalistic activity out there -- and with that demand come business models that make it quite profitable.![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: david lazarus, newspapers
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The Really Sad Thing-
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I find it nicely ironic...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I find it nicely ironic...
That's not ironic, its punny. There are two meanings to the word free at play here; "free as in beer" and "free as in speach". The two meanings have nothing to do with each other, besides a common spelling.
As such, your statement is not one of irony, its one of a play in words, aka: a pun.
I do admit tho, it is quite punny, haha.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look a little closer
An ignored story behind the copyright troubles is that there seems to be a double standard for the written word versus everything else. My theory is that the written word has been around long enough for people to realize what won't work. Not so with other media. Sadly no one seems inclined to learn from history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong Strategy
I'm sure town criers fought against the advent of "printed" news because the new media for delivery supplanted their delivery method - voice.
"Newspaper" reporters are the town criers of today because they incorrectly define their product as the media of delivery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong Strategy
The word "media" is plural. To refer to "a . . . media" is to be unaware that the the singular is "a . . . medium." In each instance of the use of the word "media" in the above message, the more accurate version, and therefore the one that communicates more effectively, is "medium."
My point is that lazy use of the language, even in newspapers, has diluted their own effectiveness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
News Articles or Stories?
Meanwhile, your newspapers (Post, Times, Free Press, etc) are more factual and rely less on writing talent than a New Magazine.
Maybe the issue here is making journalists see the difference between the often free newspaper articles and a often non-free well developed story in a news magazine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reporting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reporting
Generally they don't, at least not on the stations I listen to. I think a radio announcer who read newspapers 'verbatim' would be fired for being a boring asshole, not for violating copyright. Generally they mention the bare facts, add their own interpretation, joke around a bit. It's just good radio.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reporting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Following the money and your logic, it won't come from "subscribers" since there will be no revenue from that. It won't come from ads, since who would pay for ads that no one would view?
Will it come from corporate sponsored news, which would turn everything that isn't now into an advatorial? Would it now all be product placement?
Take a look at what has happened to the television industry. Look at what is on the networks that are supported by advertising. It's all "reality" programming. The good programming is on subscription. If you want everything on the web, it will join 99% of everything else up on the web, a bunch of crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
By blocking ads, advertisers are more attracted to the site because there are higher click per view ratio.
The content provider get to charge higher price for their suddenly more valuable ads. They also get to lower their operating cost at the same time
For you, you reap the benefit of usability and getting the most of the website.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
(x-n)/(y-n) > x / y (for all values of n > 0)
x is clicks, y is impressions, n is the blocked impressions that cannot become clicks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't take that "not subject to copyright" too far
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
x is clicks, y is impressions, n is the blocked impressions that cannot become clicks.
n should only be subtracted from y, not x. (Given the assumption that people who block ads wouldn't click on them anyhow, they won't reduce the number of clicks.) This gives us x/(y-n)... which exceeds x/y by an even larger margin than (x-n)/(y-n).
I thought blocking ads would also mean blocking tracking cookies.
Many people who block one also block the other, but it's not required - you can block just ads, just (third-party/tracking) cookies, neither, or both.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Journalist in Training's 2 cents
Please remember, I am actually entering this field soon, so I actually know a thing or two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Journalist in Training's 2 cents
Please remember, I actually read several newspapers, read several renowned news sites and watch TV, so I actually know a thing or two about quality and depth of the "news" provided by each of those media
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
somebody please
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Classifieds
My point is they could also be making money by offering other services to attact more customers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
repeating
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is writing worth reading?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newspaper journalist compliants about pay to read
[ link to this | view in chronology ]