The conversation, titled, “What’s the future of ‘objective’ journalism after David Weigel’s departure from the Post?” is particularly relevant given the recent firing of CNN Middle Eastern affairs senior editor Octavia Nasr for her poor Twitter judgement.

Sam Zell

In an interview on CNBC yesterday, Sam Zell did nothing to alleviate anxiety over the future of the print industry. The chairman and former CEO of the bankrupt Tribune Co. proposed that survival of the printed newspaper rests on the “elimination of home delivery and the replacement of it by PDF’s.”

The assertion seemed to be his own response to questions he indirectly posed during the interview about the direction of the newspaper industry. After making excuses for his company’s inability to emerge from bankruptcy — “All bankruptcy scenarios are difficult,” he said — Zell addressed the industry itself: “There’s a lot of questions because the severity of the downturn in the media business in the beginning of ’08 kind of changed the calculus and raises the whole question to any potential investor as to what’s the future, and how is the media and particularly the newspaper side of the business going to change in the future.”

Zell’s proposal revealed little hope for the industry, though this sense of resignation is hardly surprising considering the ongoing bankruptcy proceedings that have left his own newspapers (the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, the Hartford Courant and others) in shambles. And despite Zell’s depressing outlook, he did seem to offer an alternate delivery system: “The iPad is certainly the first real example of almost replicating a newspaper on an instrument,” he said.

Kind of like how his company “almost” emerged from bankruptcy last spring.

The social networking service lets users “check in” to various venues including restaurants and other businesses in cities worldwide, providing a way to alert friends about their whereabouts. The site is frequently used in conjunction with other networking sites like Twitter and Facebook and gives users the opportunity to earn badges and prestigious titles (i.e. “Mayor”) based on the number of times they frequent establishments.

Last March, Foursquare introduced an analytical feature that allowed businesses to gain access to information about their customers. And according to a February New York Times article, the founders of the networking site are also hoping to haul in profits that could (should) result from sharing information with businesses that use the service. (N.B. the Times is one of those businesses).

But the details of this “funding” seem to be shrouded in mist: not only were the specifics of the deal kept secret, but the WSJ article about the deal itself requires interested readers to subscribe for further viewing.

The decision to pick Zuckerberg’s brain for communication is perhaps the Coalition Government’s acknowledgment that social networking sites — Facebook, Twitter et al. — are the most successful media for disseminating information and maintaining support. Given Zuckerberg’s recent prediction that his site would reach one billion users in the next few years — “it is almost a guarantee that it will happen,” he told the Guardian last week — the UK government seems to be on the right track.

And with signs that UK papers may be intending to put up paywalls (The Times is asking its readers to register an account, indicating possible plans to charge readers for access to content in the future), networking sites look like a good alternative to traditional media communication. At least these networking sites are still free, even if they have always required users to register accounts.

Despite advertisers’ enthusiasm — in the memo, Quinn states that the company signed all the sponsors in less than one week — the WSJ apparently decided to limit its initial number of advertisers. Quinn wrote this: “To be honest, we could have sold a lot more but we limited the number of advertisers to six as we didn’t want to have too many advertisers trying to share the page impressions on a device that hadn’t even been introduced yet, and we wanted to create scarcity.”

Apple just released download numbers for apps last week, so advertisers only received information about possible views on Friday. But it seems like the WSJ is feeling pretty good. Not only does the memo take a stab at the New York Times (“Our main competitors such as the New York Times didn’t take advantage of the early opportunity of the iPads and ads, from product development to how they sold it in the market place”), but, according to Business Insider, the app has already earned the WSJ $2.4 million in ad revenue.

According to an article in the Washington Post, officials in the McChrystal camp have accused Michael Hastings, the reporter behind the Rolling Stone article, of publishing off-the-record conversations. Though McChrystal supporters, many of whom refused to speak on the record (admittedly, pretty understandable now), are claiming that the Rolling Stone reporter did not abide by the “ground rules” set forth by the McChrystal contingency, no one has denied actually making any of the off-color remarks. Including McChrsytal. It was only at the end of the week that sources began complaining — not about the (disparaging) content, but about the (drunken) context. And as the magazine’s executive editor Eric Bates told the Post: “None of those objections were raised during the critical few days in which this became a national issue.”

Regardless of whether journalism ethics were violated, Rolling Stone reinvigorated political reporting by exposing the U.S. military and forcing McChrystal to resign in disgrace. (For “Lady Gaga Tells All,” see page 37).

As a result, the company will not be forced to implement any sort of salary freeze, it says. But, lest employees get too excited, the letter also says this:

This does not mean that everyone will get an increase in compensation — many won’t. The current condition of the economy and our industry do not support across-the-board cost-of-living increases.

We’re encouraging our local managers to review the work of their employees, provide consistent feedback, and to highlight and reward outstanding performance. Some employees may get an increase in salary, others may be eligible for a discretionary or spot bonus, and still others may receive an increase in their target bonus. But, increases in compensation will be based on merit.

At a time when many journalists are living off their netbooks, it’s hard to complain when there is any kind of salary available. And maybe there will even be some competition in the newsroom for who can file the most stories. Or who can be coziest with these local managers.

The Times is offering $100 off a Samsung Go netbook with a one-year subscription to the Times Reader 2.0, a “next-generation news reader.”

Given the extreme plug Apple gave the Times at the iPad launch (see the live  blog update posted at 1:50 p.m.), the Samsung promotion seems slightly nefarious.

Or maybe it’s part of the Times’ plan to stay cozy with Apple. The Reader only provides the last seven days of Times news whereas the iPad – at least according to reports that Apple CEO Steve Jobs is in talks with the Times to offer a new way to stream content to the iPad’s e-reader – would provide live, fluid (arguably more appealing) news. Bonus: the Reader  program doesn’t require internet access.

But why the Times would want to partner with a netbook when it already has obvious support from the iPad is a mystery. Though not as much a mystery as why anyone would want to read week-old stagnant pages of a newspaper on a  screen that’s as lilliputian as the keyboard attached to it.