31–40 of 65 posts
I'd like to see a citation on that "2%". I don't believe it.
What will we miss? Obviously, the basic reportage function of newspapers is what we'll miss--the boring research, interviewing, verifying, and so on. This is something that bloggers cannot reproduce without a news infrastructure and being on salary.
Won't miss anything, haven't picked up a newspapers in years.
Likewise. I kind of felt like saying "I'll miss all the same stuff I missed already 10 years ago, like investigative reporting." But now I can't even remember if they were doing that 10 years ago.
What's left is local news, investigative journalism and intelligent coverage of national news. Perhaps 2% of the cost of a typical paper. I'd like to see a citation on that "2%". I don't believe it. What will we miss? Obviously, the basic reportage function of newspapers is what we'll miss--the boring research, interviewing, verifying, and so on. This is something that bloggers cannot reproduce without a news infrast…
The only newspaper I would miss is The Economist - global, comprehensive, opinionated (for good or bad), analysis in depth. But I won't have to miss it, since The Economist is doing very well, probably for precisely the same reasons that so many people like me would miss it...
The Economist is doing well I believe, as is the Atlantic monthly. People are willing to pay for quality opinion. People are also willing to pay for late breaking news from the AP and Bloomberg. In addition to the option of paying for late breaking news, TV and radio both give it away for free. The papers are just middle men. They add nothing of value to the AP feed that they just regurgitate. And their editorial wor…
Maybe the economist et al. are adding staff, but I suspect there are simply many fewer total investigative journalists, and so less investigative journalism. Maybe if the Chicago tribune hadn't cut so much, they would have broken the Blagojevich story instead of the FBI?
Seating on a porch and spreading a crisp newspaper with my two hands while sipping on a hot coffee. That I will miss, but certainly not the content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Economist is doing well I believe, as is the Atlantic monthly. People are willing to pay for quality opinion. People are also willing to pay for late breaking news from the AP and Bloomberg. In addition to the option of paying for late breaking news, TV and radio both give it away for free. The papers are just middle men. They add nothing of value to the AP feed that they just regurgitate. And their editorial wor…
It is oversimplistic to say that papers add nothing of value. Surely you admit that the NYT, Wash. Post, and WSJ do original investigative research? Others papers sometimes do this also, although this seems to be decreasing. Everytime I visit my hometown in flyover country, I am frightened by how worthless the local paper has become. But there was a time, not long ago, when that paper had a staff in most major cities…
The papers could not find a good way to monetize the valuable investigative journalism and so they've cut it, and cut it and cut it.
I work at a newspaper. If they do it right, they won't be gone, they'll just adapt.
What's left is local news, investigative journalism and intelligent coverage of national news. Perhaps 2% of the cost of a typical paper. I'd like to see a citation on that "2%". I don't believe it. What will we miss? Obviously, the basic reportage function of newspapers is what we'll miss--the boring research, interviewing, verifying, and so on. This is something that bloggers cannot reproduce without a news infrast…
2% seems to me laughably low. I would think it is something like 50%. It might take up 2% of the space of a paper, but the reasons we will miss it is because no one else appears ready to do it. Why not? Expense.