For John, BLUF: Newspapers have to find their place in the 21st Century. Nothing to see here; just move along.
At 11:12 last evening, The InstaPundit posted this item, with the link:
HOW JOURNALISM “PROFESSIONALS” KILLED THE WASHINGTON POST.The linked article may be a little over-drawn, but does raise the question as to what is the proper business model for newspapers these days? Whatever was its business model, the recent owners and managers of The Boston Globe weren't able to make it pay. A real free press, and state controlled media is not a "free press", needs to pay it's own way.
Here is an insightful comment at the linked article (from Wildcat72)
"Journalism" has always been punditry and opinion. The difference is that Rush Limbaugh is honest about it while the WaPO and NYT lie about it and claim to be "objective".So why does Mr Limbaugh make money at this and The Boston Globe and The Washington Post don't? Regards — Cliff
With regard to the business model.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/08/07/online_news_hasn_t_killed_newspapers.html
I'm not sure that the majors have ever had a long life expectancy. The editorialists have long sold their opinions to various newspaper editors and that has been largely the characterization of each of the biggies. WAPO and NYT have been largely supportive of liberalism....and their oped bench works hard to promote that zeitgeist. WSJ on the other hand is the opposite....generally.
ReplyDeleteHowever, "news" is, like politics, a local phenomenon. People have long picked up their local fish wrapper to find out the local smut and revel in whatever the issue of the local day might be. Sadly, local revenue won't support the business of producing those papers. Many if not most die slowly from multiple page publications to fewer pages with less news to one page and finally....nothing.
In the end.....the REAL news isn't really news. It consists of folks with a view to air and the ability to air it. This is one of the reasons that the internet has had such an impact. The blogosphere IS the newspaper of the day...and...I submit...it is influential in forming public and political attitudes. The small town rag can still serve its traditional purpose.....but at a price most won't pay...especially the staff who want a more worldly offering....something already provided by the talking heads on the major "news" networks.
As a conclusion.....today the news really isn't at all. It is a skillful presentation of human activity that is designed to evoke a wished for response from the consumer...and the greater the stage....the more unreliable the "news" becomes as an offering of objective fact.