The Future Of Journalism Doesn't Have A Head Office

from the and-it's-way-bigger-than-HuffPo dept

Wed, Mar 7th 2012 10:18pm — Leigh Beadon

Globe and Mail columnist Simon Houpt is unsure about the future of journalism. For a recent piece, he visited the offices of Huffington Post Canada and raised questions about the publication's approach to news curation and reporting. A lot of the usual HuffPo topics are dicussed (is aggregation theft? Is it wrong to not pay bloggers?) but there's one statement right at the beginning that I want to address:

The future of journalism looks like an ad agency.

This is what you think when you walk into the downtown Toronto offices of the Huffington Post’s Canadian operation, which it shares with its corporate parent, AOL Canada Inc. You probably don’t even need a description to imagine the scene, but here goes: Airy, two-storey, loft-like playpen on Spadina Avenue. Exposed brick. Rows of young folk in checkered flannel shirts staring intently into oversized monitors. A pair of electric guitars hanging above the boss’s desk, which sits invitingly in the corner rather than hiding away in a separate office.

For one thing, I'm not sure what's so scary about newsrooms becoming more open, accessible and friendly—to me, that doesn't immediately say "ad agency". But much more importantly, the Huffington Post is not the head office of modern journalism.

HuffPo is one brand, one network—a widespread and highly successful one to be sure, but just one piece of the puzzle. The simple fact is, there is no one hub of modern journalism. In fact, one of the biggest defining characteristics of journalism in the digital era is a movement away from centralization, with quality content coming from a huge array of sources both big and small.

It's old-world thinking that leads people to seek a single organization they can look to as an example of what journalism is becoming, and that prevents them from seeing the real change: the future of journalism doesn't have a head office, and it's not defined by what the Huffington Post is doing.

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: future, huffington post, journalism

28 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 7 Mar 2012 @ 11:56pm

Is aggregation theft?
Well DUH! I mean, it's not like we at the respectable legacy news media would stoop to something like that....oh, wait...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:02am

Redundant
Sorry, but this article is completely bare of any content that is in any way relevant to modern journalism and media. You generalise from the specific - a description you found on the net - and then proceed to make some vague point extrapolating from that generalisation. What exactly is your point? You're so vague. The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.

Jaded,
Angus Maiden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:43am
  
  Re: Redundant
  Oh the irony of your Subject title.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hfbs (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 3:26am
  
  Re: Redundant
  > The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.
  
  Course it isn't. Because TD is a blog, not a news site.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 6:57am
    
    Re: Re: Redundant
    You are wrong. Journalism will come in many forms. Techdirt is a single (used loosely) topic news site based around IP issues. Specialized blogs are becoming more important as time goes by. I follow about 20 single topic blogs, 5 or 6 general blogs-news sites via RSS, and get things of interesting through FaceBook and Google+.
    
    The future of news is , news you trust, the topics you want, when you want them. Mike has been balls accurate on IP issues which is why I come back. My only complaint is his titles read like they are from a tabloid.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Leigh Beadon (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 5:41am
  
  Re: Redundant
  I felt my point was pretty clear: modern journalism is increasingly decentralized, and commentators who talk about the "future of journalism" based on one office of one company are not really seeing the big picture.
  
  So... what exactly is your complaint? I mean yeah, there's a LOT more that can be discussed on this topic - this was in no way intended to be a comprehensive post on every aspect of journalism today. But if you want to delve deeper into the details and discuss it more, I'd be happy to - just, try to only hit submit once next time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Angus (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 6:19am
    
    Re: Re: Redundant
    It wasn't clear. You just commented on the look and feel of one part of the enormous machine that is journalism. You then jumped straight from Simon's description of the Huffington Post office to your point about global media. No continuity. I get what you're saying though, so it's cool. Sorry if I was a bit rude. I have no complaints, I just felt like venting my anger that I burnt my finger on the stove... 4 times o_0
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 7:07am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Redundant
      Marcus's article does seems a bit rushed. But you can not expect every article to be a full blown analysis of the future trends of journalism. This one simply points you in the direction of an article, and gives commentary about how the reporter doesn't see whats happening online.
      
      Blogs, social media, general news sites, RSS feeds, email, Reddit like sites, all have a role to play in the future of journalism.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 7:07am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Redundant
      Marcus's article does seems a bit rushed. But you can not expect every article to be a full blown analysis of the future trends of journalism. This one simply points you in the direction of an article, and gives commentary about how the reporter doesn't see whats happening online.
      
      Blogs, social media, general news sites, RSS feeds, email, Reddit like sites, all have a role to play in the future of journalism.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Leigh Beadon (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 9:17am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Redundant
      It's fine. I think the continuity is a little stronger than you say though - the article is titled "Is the Huffington Post the future of journalism?" and then opens with a broad sweeping statement about what the future of journalism looks like. I wanted to push back on an article that equates one organization so strongly with the entire journalistic pursuit.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:03am

Redundant
Sorry, but this article is completely bare of any content that is in any way relevant to modern journalism and media. You generalise from the specific - a description you found on the net - and then proceed to make some vague point extrapolating from that generalisation. What exactly is your point? You're so vague. The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.

Jaded,
Angus Maiden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- welllll, 8 Mar 2012 @ 3:53pm
  
  Re: Redundant
  if techdirt is not the future at least it will more then likely last longer then traditional *journalism* will.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:03am

Redundant
Sorry, but this article is completely bare of any content that is in any way relevant to modern journalism and media. You generalise from the specific - a description you found on the net - and then proceed to make some vague point extrapolating from that generalisation. What exactly is your point? You're so vague. The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.

Jaded,
Angus Maiden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:03am

Redundant
Sorry, but this article is completely bare of any content that is in any way relevant to modern journalism and media. You generalise from the specific - a description you found on the net - and then proceed to make some vague point extrapolating from that generalisation. What exactly is your point? You're so vague. The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.

Jaded,
Angus Maiden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:11am
  
  Re: Redundant
  Could you repeat that? I didn't catch it the first five times.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:12am
  
  Re: Redundant
  Could you repeat that? I didn't catch it the first five times.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 7:09am
    
    Re: Re: Redundant
    Funny, I missed it also. Maybe next time he will post in all CAPS....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:32am

Redundant
Sorry, but this article is completely bare of any content that is in any way relevant to modern journalism and media. You generalise from the specific - a description you found on the net - and then proceed to make some vague point extrapolating from that generalisation. What exactly is your point? You're so vague. The future of journalism is certainly not at Techdirt.

Jaded,
Angus Maiden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:34am
  
  Re: Redundant
  Say it again! Say. It. Again.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gwiz (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 7:53am
  
  Re: Redundant
  I'm guessing the Department of Redundancy Department hasn't faced any budget cuts yet.
  
  Oh wait, they would have at least two budgets to work with, wouldn't they.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Angus, 8 Mar 2012 @ 12:35am

Whoops
Sorry, my phone was giving me a 404. Looks like the future of smartphone intergration isn't on Techdirt either o_0
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 2:20am
  
  Re: Whoops
  Every time you post anywhere and get an error the first thing you do is give it a minute and check to see if the data was sent, errors happens all the time and are mostly due to end users networks or somewhere in between them.
  
  You are in luck, if you was in a gaming forum they would berate and make fun of you. It would make the day of some.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 5:20am
  
  Re: Whoops
  Haha! I post quite frequently to Techdirt from my phone, never had that problem. Seems like trying 5 times was a bit of overkill tho, no?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2012 @ 2:14am

Reminds me of that scene in Pulp Fiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hfbs (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 3:38am

Because God FORBID a workplace should be airy, welcoming and fun. We all know a workplace should be grey cubicle after grey cubicle, full of suits and ties, stuffy, boring, grey..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AG Wright (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 3:52am

Amazing
Gee a news room that is a large open area with people at desks staring at screens.
That pretty much describes the local paper and the news room on every movie that I've ever seen. What's so hard to understand about that?
Oh and Angus, at least you're not putting it in all caps but that isn't impressive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TimK (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 5:11am

Huffington Post
I've never read nor been to the Huffington Post site....until today. My God is it awful. I'm not talking about the content, but the layout and design. What a mess. It reminds me of MySpace. There is crap all over the place. I can't tell what's a story, what's a picture, what's an ad.

OK, maybe its not as bad as MySpace, but it still looks cobbled together and confusing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sgt_doom (profile), 8 Mar 2012 @ 10:32am

What media?????
".. the Huffington Post is not the head office of modern journalism."

Perfectly stated! Indeed, the heavy censorship practised on Ariana's site is legendary, the latest attack was when populist Jesse Ventura simply mentioned that questions should be raised concerning the 9/11 commission report, and his blog posting was immediately pulled.

But then, one can one expect from the past partner of Andrew Breitbart, who divorced her wealthy Gay husband when he lost the election, and overnight declared her neocon self to suddenly be a "progressive" --- right, a George Mason University ultra-neocon "progressive" --- for sure, doods and doodettes!

Thanks, there is no media today in America, regardless of the numerous idiots in Academia, claiming to be journalism profs, who endlessly refer to "the media" or "the MainStreamMedia" --- give the masses a break, already, with five heavily financially interlocked corporations, equally financially interlocked with the top three banksters, calling the shots, and acting as one, there is effectively one corporation controlling the vast bulk of the American myth-media.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]