Columnist wonders if technology is killing journalism

The JRC memo was totally insane. But - amidst the ocean of BS - the suggestion of uploading the city council agenda was a good one. Covering local government, the city council, planning and zoning, the board of education, is at the heart of daily journalism.

Taxpayers want to know what their government is up to, and what it's spending money on. And besides, it should take, what, five minutes?

 

I think one of the big impacts technology is having on journalism is making it easier for entities which usually depended on news orgs to "tell their story" and disperse their info to do it themselves. In a lot of cases, local government, sports teams and school districts can appear to be doing a better job "covering" themselves than the local newspaper.

 

I'm not quite sure I follow.

The only other delivery system other than printed product is by electronic product. And if people won't pay for it today, why would they have paid for it 10 years ago (especially when you would need EVERY COMPANY on board to make it work --- one company goes the other way and says "We're still free!", and customers flock to it.). Sure, "the industry" is working together now (sharing, etc.) because it has to. But to expect all 1,400 daily newspapers to band together as a group in 2001 to deal with the internet boom is crazy --- and even if they had, readers could still get their news and video and box scores and standings from other free sources.

Serious question: How many internet ads do you click on in a week? And if you don't, why should we expect readers to? And if readers won't, why should we expect advertisers to pay anything?

Could they have beaten craigslist to the punch? Sure, but letting people post ads for free like craigslist does isn't much of a business model.

Circuit City closes its doors, and the company loses a $1 million account. That's 10 jobs that need to be cut to make up the difference. Who gets blamed for that?

I guess I just don't get the idea that the "management/leadership" should be flogged for, say, not inventing Google or Facebook. Well, YOU didn't invent them, either, and the opportunity was there for everyone.

 

Newspapers faced two problems, giving away the product for free online and competition from other news and entertainment sources.

Even if all news websites implemented pay walls, readers wouldn't pony up for a subscription because they have other things they would rather spend their money on. Plus, TV stations and the cable news networks will always have a website to post news since that isn't cannibalizing revenue from the TV side, and brings in a little extra revenue,.

 

If this is morphing into a "Who Killed Newspapers?" thread, there's this:

Newspapers killed newspapers.

Corporate ownership required newspapers continue to print money (how many businesses have a 20 percent profit margin; most would be happy with 10). When the profit margins dipped, cuts had to be made to satisfy stockholders. Even making a 15 percent profit wasn't enough. With the bean counters calling the shots, newsroom staffs were slashed. That meant the unique aspect of a newspaper - finding THE story, covering it, reporting it, writing about - was lost. Fewer people read the paper, ad sales drop, circulation drops, the profit margin dips, more cuts are made to satisfy investors ... it's a death spiral.

 

It's about balance and being honest with yourself. There've been times when I've been sent on assignments and felt I could produce much more given the time and the investment in my time (particularly if I'm on the road). Last night, between tweeting, blogging, texting, re-tweeting and writing, I had no time to emphasize quality and that, to me, was to the detriment of the product.

So there is a balance that can be struck. One must ask, what is a reasonable workload and what is being underproductive in an era when technology gives you more ways to be productive.

 

I agree, Brian.

And your point speaks to one I almost made, is that no two situations are exactly alike. Everyone has to find the balance that works for them.