Some Much Needed Optimism In The Journalism World
from the look-at-the-opportunities dept
There have been a large number of "downer" stories recently on the newspaper business -- which has certainly been struggling. But there are a few stories coming out that highlights how, like any challenge, for some this really represents a big opportunities. First, there's a post by Steve Outing, where he talks about an (as yet unnamed) group of recently laid off journalists from a major newspaper who are actually using their severance packages to start an online competitor. Who knows if it will succeed (and, I'd worry that just bringing in old newspaper guys alone won't be enough), but it is interesting that they're basically using the severance packages to bootstrap the new organization.Next up, courtesy of Mathew Ingram is a discussion on why the current crisis in newspapers should lead to better journalism. This goes against the hand-wringing of many in the industry right now who seem to think that as newspapers go under -- so does journalism. That, of course, makes the huge mistake in assuming that journalism only comes from newspapers. The discussion includes a long list of things that will get better once the old structures go away, and new opportunities are embraced. You should read the whole thing, but it includes a recognition that the online world will likely create more respect for the audience, more reporters & more reporting, better reporting since the audience is more involved in the process and more ways to tell a story. That all sounds good.
And finally, for those of you still clinging to the idea that physical newspapers are the preferred medium, Ken Paulson recently gave a speech, where he outlined an alternate reality where the newspaper was invented after the internet. The point was to highlight the "advantages" that a newspaper provides to the internet. I'm not so sure that the advantages are really all that compelling in most cases, but it does show that perhaps the newspapers bemoaning the supposed death of print should be a bit more focused on providing more value, rather than complaining about the internet.
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: newspapers, optimism
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
My Fear
I want a trusted, credible, accurate news source that follows the accepted news-gathering standards.
Right now I know that if I see news from another city I can trust that news if it came from that city's local newspaper.
If newspapers go away, how do I know which news is trusted, credible, and accurate? Do I need to build my own personal list of credible sources from among the "news" sites that might spring up on the Internet?
(Related: The financial troubles of local television stations and their news operations are the subject of an article in today's Wall Street Journal.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newspapers fall between the immediacy of the Internet and the monthly schedule of a magazine. They can take a day or two to seek out interviews, prepare informational graphics, and give readers some real background for stories. I'd rather wait a day and get the real story instead of getting a hackneyed reaction to partial information.
If newspapers go under, it's because they offer nothing of value -- and if they offer nothing of value, it's because they aren't trying hard enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]