Monthly Archives: July 2009

Opinions, for a fee

Yesterday, The San Francisco Chronicle pulled a politically controversial opinions column written by the Chronicle’s former editor, Phil Bronstein, according to BayNewser. This wasn’t a case of censorship, said the paper’s editor, but instead a decision to offer premium content on their online site, SFGate, to subscribers.

But the decision to feature opinions pieces online for a fee seems to jeopardize not only journalistic integrity, but also print. International, national, local news, reviews, features — all are free. But when commentary, what one could argue is the cornerstone of online media, is only available to those willing to pay for the web? Well, there’s probably a blog for that.

The front page decision

Yesterday, deputy managing editor of The New York Times told The New York Observer he “still considers the front page of the printed newspaper a sacred space,” despite the constantly shifting content of the paper’s online homepage. “Nothing about the Web has changed the front page of the paper in any fundamental way,” he said.

It makes sense that the popularity of an article on the Web should hold no bearing on the next day’s front page, that an article’s appeal moments after it lands on the homepage shouldn’t influence it’s subsequent placement in print. The homepage can be tweaked instantaneously, while the printed front page must last all day. But perhaps this is why print is losing its luster — the front page holds yesterday’s news.

Second-quarter earnings for New York Times Co.

The AP reported that The New York Times Co. will disclose second-quarter earnings tomorrow. Beleaguered by ad revenue losses and mired in the catastrophe that is The Boston Globe, the Times has managed to avoid widespread newsroom layoffs so far. But this may bode badly for their second-quarter profits. The trick, one analyst speculates, will be to increase online profits without alienating readers.

The Times is, however, considering selling their share of the Boston Red Sox in an attempt to save their flagship paper. Experts say it’s unlikely Babe Ruth will come with the deal.

The Slate experiment

Yesterday, Michael Kinsley wrote in Slate about readers of print vs. web. Who was better informed, he wondered? Today, he has an update in a piece called News Junkie Smackdown. Two journalists read only the web for an hour each day, and two journalists read only print. The main difference seems to be the amount of commentary available on the web. And a curious story about $4 million ham that wasn’t in any of the newspapers. But whatever, pork isn’t kosher, anyway.

News from space

40 years ago, the astronauts on Apollo 11 broadcast into a void, sharing news with an invisible audience. Before landing, Buzz Aldrin radioed to Earth, saying:

This is the LM pilot. I’d like to take this opportunity to ask every person listening in, whoever and wherever they may be, to pause for a moment and contemplate the events of the past few hours and to give thanks in his or her own way.

Today, the AP ran an article about the four astronauts on the current Endeavor space shuttle mission. The astronauts today answer questions posted on YouTube. They twitter. The article says this:

The YouTube questions were the latest effort by NASA to embrace social media.

Blogging science

An editorial in Nature, an international weekly journal of science, urged researchers to enter the blogosphere to promote scientific communication, arguing that blogging was ‘part of science, journalism and public discourse.’ With everyone able to contribute ideas and discuss new developments, the often convoluted results of complex research can be explained and debated in a public, accessible forum, the editorial argued.

GlobalPost, an online international news site, posted an interview yesterday with Bora Zivkovic, series editor of The Open Laboratory, a printed anthology of the best science blogging. An online article about a printed compilation of online science writing. Very meta.

‘We still love print’

The New Yorker, June 8, 2009:

New Yorker, June 8, 2009

Obama’s health care reform and the press

President Obama is doing everything to promote his health care reform, cranking out statements and making appeals to audiences across all lines of communication. He is using web addresses, TV appearances and conference calls with bloggers.

“I don’t know whether he will Twitter or tweet,” senior adviser David Axelrod told The Washington Post on Monday. “But he’s going to be very, very visible.”

Before the explosion of new media, politicians relied on personal interaction and the press, fireside chats and evening addresses. Debates on the Constitution, Abolitionism, the New Deal were displayed in print, with favorable press holding immense significance in their ultimate passage. Success was largely dependent on intimate relationships with journalists, and no one exemplified this better than President Roosevelt.

In a New York Times blog chronicling Obama’s first 100 days in office, Jean Edward Smith writes about taming the press Roosevelt style:

No president enjoyed more favorable press coverage than F.D.R., and no president worked more assiduously to cultivate it…

By inviting the entire press corps into the Oval Office, every correspondent had a sense that he or she was participating in the new administration. That they were being confided in by the president and treated as a partner. There was also no sense that the president was playing favorites. Everyone was treated equally…

He concludes:

Roosevelt, who had once been editor-in-chief of the Harvard Crimson, considered himself a former journalist. He enjoyed company of reporters and fully understood what he and they could do for each other. His sessions with the White House press corps were virtuoso performances that got the administration position into print with a minimum of friction.

And Obama is using the traditional press. But he is also sharing his message across broader lines using new forms of public discussion.

Perhaps he has not only followed Roosevelt’s methods, but Lincoln’s, too. In an article in US News last February, Justin Ewers writes about Abraham Lincoln:

He was a man with little formal schooling who was quick to grasp the power of new technology, and an unusually humble statesman who did as much as any politician of his era to cultivate his own image.

Just like Lincoln and Roosevelt, Obama is using the press to his advantage. But this time, everyone is the press.

‘Fortress Journalism’

In a document made available by The BBC College of Journalism called The Future of Journalism, editor Peter Horrocks writes about the transformation of news in the digital age in his paper, The End of Fortress Journalism:

Most journalists have grown up with a fortress mindset. They have lived and worked in proud institutions with thick walls. Their daily knightly task has been simple: to battle journalists from other fortresses. But the fortresses are crumbling and courtly jousts with fellow journalists are no longer impressing the crowds. The end of fortress journalism is deeply unsettling for us and requires a profound change in the mindset and culture of journalism.

Other papers in the collection are similarly grim: Death of the Story and Video Games: A New Medium for Journalism. Pass the Wii controller. I’m advancing my worldly knowledge.

A glimmer of hope

Media stocks had a strong trading day yesterday, buoyed by, you got it, newspaper groups. Both The Australian and The Wall Street Journal reported second-quarter earnings that slightly reversed depressingly colossal losses of late. I won’t tell anyone that budget and staff cuts were largely responsible for the gains, and advertising revenue continued to decline if you don’t.

The Boston Globe lives another day

The Globe agreed to a $10 million package of cuts. To the detriment of jobs, pensions, benefits, vacations, and leaves of absence, (not to mention egos and an inkling of sustained financial security), print and a paper’s integrity endure. For now.

Print for profit

Michael White writes in this month’s Vanity Fair about the Politico Web site as the answer to who will continue reporting after traditional journalism’s demise. Not only has Politico revived political journalism by tenaciously covering Washington after the investigative stillness of the Bush years, but it was also started by former reporters from the paper that brought us Watergate. It continues to draw incredible web traffic (over 3.8 million people per month), even months after the presidential election it was created to cover. Not bad for a site that draws a large portion of its profit from its print version.

Slate and Michael Kinsley on print vs. web

This is a great article by Michael Kinsley posted this afternoon. From characterizing the LA Times as ‘formerly great’ and ‘squeezed into irrelevance,’ to the awesome use of ‘jeremiad’ (twice), Kinsley is brilliant. And he invites online readers to discuss the day’s news, thus generating our own news in determining just how journalistically proficient we actually are.

Or, he says, continue reading newspapers and don’t participate. You’ll just be the control group.

‘Web Journalisme’

An article in Le Monde last week heralded The NY Times’ integration of print and web media. Michael Zimbalist, vice president for research and development operations, told Le Monde this:

Aujourd’hui, il n’y a plus un seul journaliste qui ne travaille que pour le papier.

Today, there is not a single journalist who works only for the paper.

Fighting in print, fighting online

Two local papers in London presented different views on the same neighborhood story. Unsurprisingly, the paper that requires a subscription reported a more negative spin on the news, while the council-run paper championed the positive. Is it little surprise then that the paid-for newspaper lacks as broad a readership and robust advertisement revenue as the happily upbeat free paper?

The same commentary on the battle between local papers on their last legs offers this positive spin for the future:

I’m bound to say that the independent voice – or voices – to hold local power to account in future look as if they will be raised entirely online. This is a matter to celebrate rather than lament.

Initially, start-up websites and blogs may well be negative too. There will be a wild west period. But sensible, moderate voices will surely emerge due to greater public participation.

Print journalists already make too much of the supposed anarchy on the net. I seem to recall from reading newspaper histories that similar hysteria greeted newspapers in the 17th century. Order will eventually arise, and maybe more swiftly than many critics believe.