The death of the P.I. and its "life in death" on the Web is only the second in a trend that will grow. And as the other papers fail into the Web we will hear, again and again, about the Internet, about Craigslist, about The Drudge Report, and a hundred other reasons these papers are dead. What we will never hear is that their editorial policies and news slanting were part and parcel of their demise. We will never hear about the willed insults, slights, and snubbing of fully half of their potential circulation pool. Journalists and editors write a lot about "taking personal responsibility" when it comes to others. You never hear them write that about themselves. There's no mea culpa among liberal newspaper journalists these days. There's only "The Internet ate my newspaper."
Driving in my car just before noon, I ended up listening to CBC Radio and Evan Salomon interview someone about the move to on-line for the Seattle P-I. To listen to him was painful, you would have thought that the end of the world had come and 'what will become of professional journalists!' since blogs just regurgitate information from 'real' journalists. I had to stop rolling my eyes since I was driving.
A great victory for Intel, AMD, Microsoft, Linux and all the other brains that make up the computer industry have slayed the dead tree industry!
The greenies should be wildly cheering in the streets. WE HAVE SAVED THE FORESTS, WE HAVE SAVED THE FORESTS!! What do we get, but great silence?
Flora and fauna about the world, hail the great victory over the dreaded newspaper industry.
Buster the Cat, Cal Coyote, and Clem Cougar all thank the computer industry for saving their homes.
Small Dead Animals of the forests unite in this great victory of plebeians on their keyboards!!
Huzzah, huzzah, HUZZAH!!
Cheers
Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden(Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group "True North"
Maureen,
same here. I was listening to CBC radio. It's funny cuz they kept talking about how it was moving to an online news source. Then they went on to talk about Huffington Post which doesn't make a profit and doesn't have that large a following compared to, oh, the Druge report or Ace of Spades.
I read this article in the Globe and Mail on Saturday. They interviewed Professor Chavez from the University of California, Berkley so you knew she was a Conservative.
The funny thing was she teaches journalism at Berkley. She decided one day to start an online newspaper of sorts to fill the void from newspaper in San Fran suffering. She only got 100 hits a day! And she's teaching journalism!?
Like the old saying, those who do do, those who can't do teach, those who can't teach teach teachers, those who can't teach teachers consult.
Happy happy happy! Now I just wait for the Seattle Times . . .
Next: The internet ate my slide rule.
The coup de grace for the MSM.
...-
"20 years ago, Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web. For his next project, he's building a web for open, linked data that could do for numbers what the Web did for words, pictures, video: unlock our data and reframe the way we use it together."
urlm.in/bxrw
Then they went on to talk about Huffington Post which doesn't make a profit and doesn't have that large a following compared to, oh, the Druge report or Ace of Spades.
Ahem ... SDA beat out Ace of Spades in the last poll for the best political blog ... USA and Canada. I don't believe CBC bothered to report that fact.
Being from the half that the MSM regularly insults and offends, I am happy happy happy that they are becoming unemployed. Zero sympathy and I don't care if they have families at home who will suffer. Those lefties are not good at thinking things through to a logical conclusion ... which is why they still think socialism can work.
FYI lefties .... socialism cannot possibly work because the vast majority of it's proponents do not. There are very few employers in the socialist world. Ask any Cuban whose wife or mother is hooking tourists to feed their families.
Further, Most of what the MSM call news is just gossip and tripe. There will continue to be all the news anyone wants on TV. That's not going away for awhile. Also Radio, my second best choice after the Web is still fairly vital since they can also stimulate your auditory senses with musical interludes.
These days any news that is a day old is called history. The news business didn't notice that either.
It's all good.
Dodo's probably once felt they were being unfairly treated too.
Dinosaur Tip: The ones who bend the news seem prone to the belief that they're too good for the world. My guess is that the intra-MSM opinion is that the MSM was merely on the wrong end of the techno-curve; bias had nothing to do with it.
After the shock ebbs, and they discover that the slanting has something to do with it, they'll entertain going supernova...and might.
One can only hope that this trend continues, perhaps then we will be spared having David Suzuki being the "guest editor" for the Vancouver Sun and the girlish editor swooning at this "coup".
Perhaps their green edition will also refrain from stories of people being able to swim directly to the North Pole because of global warming ice-melt. I kid you not.
Most newspapers are glorified press release gatherers anyway, we can access that crap on the internet if we feel inclined. As for editorial comment, I can do without having left-leaning journos telling me how to think.
oh how sweet it is . . . .
Just a few things to keep in mind:
Right-wing papers are suffering too.
Drudge has very little original content. He gets his material from online versions of newspapers. Where will he get his material when the papers are gone?
What you'll really miss is the wire service. Places like AP make their money by selling the same story to multiple customers. Once it's all online, nobody will buy AP's story from Bumfeck Egypt once it gets on one site and anyone in the world can read it. So, the wire services will die, except for the state-run shills of said state like TASS, AFP, etc. Wire service reports will more and more resemble Pravda.
Papers aren't dying (at least solely) because of their leftiness. They're dying because their ad revenue dried up, and that has multiple causes. Any paper in trouble now could return to profitability once they rework their revenue model. Unfortunately, no one seems to be trying that.
There was an article at another website talking about how Special Forces and ex-Special Forces types are in extremely high demand outside of the military all over the world and can easily get very high-paying jobs.
(HERE'S WHERE I GET PERTINENT TO THIS THREAD...)
My comment to that article:
"The phrase here is "market value". Trained, combat-experienced Special Forces guys have it, big-time. A lot of people highly value their "product".
Conversely, I've yet to read an ad "WANTED: Semi-literate but glib leftist journalist, proficient in stringing together cliches, distorting and/or ignoring facts and producing BS on regular deadlines. Real research and objective critical thinking skills not required." Loads of them around and ever fewer people are buying."
What do you think, fellow SDA-Readers? 1. Did I make a point on why much of the MSM is now swirling around the toilet bowl? AND 2. Was I nasty enough? :-)
Dave in PA. Acorn is hiring.
Anybody want to pick the date the Toronto Star implodes? Profits are down by more than 275%. Without the Harlequin Romance division this thing would be done.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20086.html
link to a story about were lefties hang out on line to get the line on the SPIN:-))))))
Folks I'm a long time reader of this blog and many others, http://www.buzzmachine.com/ where the changes occuring in the MSM have been discussed for a long time and I agree with many of the comments.
However, this site like many others mainly links to newsgathering sites. Rarely is there an self written editoral here.
The guy at http://blackrod.blogspot.com/ does seem to do research on items he finds interesting and writes in detail on a topic. Many sports site have significant editorial and analysis - with lots of comments. Ezra Levant writes in detail on a topic http://ezralevant.com/ editorals/opinions if you like.
So although I visit this site multiple times weekly and appreciate it, I do wonder who is going to produce the copy that is linked here with lots of comments. Sites like http://bourque.org/ are not the same but they are similar.
Is Lorne Gunter going to have his own site (which he has had) and write an online column daily and if so how will he be renumerated?
I think it is safe to say that the MSM that tends to be conservative is as financially challenged as left leaning MSM. So I wonder about a site like SDA, I hope it gets stronger, however it seems there is a viability issue here also.
Don't crucify me I'm just wondering, and sorry I don't know how to do a hot link with Opera in a comment.
Maureen
Evan Solomon - I loathe him ever since the hatchet job he did on Stockwell Day a few years back. He together with'supermodel enza anderson' (some toronto transvestite - enough said) performed a vile skit mocking Day. Pure unadulterated venom - and of course it was on cbc. I'm used to the usual cbc bias in a resigned way - but that one really shocked me.
There will always be people who will want to do what they do even if they can't get a big paycheck from the MSM. Musicians and artists don't quit just because they do not or cannot get rich doing their thing.
Who pays MichaelYon for his fabulous war reporting?
Like most conservative, self-reliant types, I see the demise of the MSM due of lack of funding as a opportunity for a new type of news reporter. Those who will take on a story and do the leg work, then sell that story to the blogosphere.
All successful businesses started where there was a need to be filled.
Don't worry, when something important happens, we will hear about it pretty quickly one way or another. Again, most MSM news is gossip and tripe anyway. Most news is not important. It is often simply interesting, but you would be undiminished if you didn't happen to read about it. What the hell can anyone do about news they learn about that pisses them off. Nothing! Well, they can go get some high blood pressure meds perhaps, but not much else.
In recent years news has become entertainment anyway. Everyone has their own idea about what entertainment they want. There is plenty to go around. New is the one place I like diversity. The MSM is a gaggle of pappagalli. Not be confused with the Paparazzi.
What bothers me is all the news that doesn't get reported. The bad shit that our governments and corporates do that no one is privy to. That isn't getting reported by any new agencies and those are the happenings that often have the greatest effect on us. That won't change.
"Any paper in trouble now could return to profitability once they rework their revenue model. Unfortunately, no one seems to be trying that."
'Fortunate' is more the word I had in mind - and i'm glad the the lefties are too dull to retool.
As to content, I hope things are still evolving and the void will be filled more creatively than it has. Creatively, a year on the web as in politics, is a lifetime anywhere else. If the only content they have to pitch is spin, I can do without it.
Anyway who needs 150 newspapers quoting the same story from AP? Frog march them all to the wall.
John you made a valid point, the highlight of my day was making a hot chocolate and reading three papers but they became so liberal biased I couldn't read them anymore. I canceled the subscriptions and explained why I did so to those papers and not once did they even attempt to refute my assertion that they were leftwing papers that espoused liberal ideology.
Why should I pay for liberal indoctornation when I can sashshay over to the Globe and spew my venom for free. I don't have the stomach for CBC or Torstar.
There haave been some good points made but I have not seen a comment on a main point. Advertising. It's the engine of the MSM and I think they may question current effectiveness after the readjustment of the market. There may be less but there will always be a market in some shape or form. It could lead to major corporations sponsoring the purchase of the news ie AP.
Tom Paine writes: "...What you'll really miss is the wire service. Places like AP make their money by selling the same story to multiple customers. Once it's all online, nobody will buy AP's story.... So, the wire services will die, except for the state-run shills ...like TASS, AFP, etc. Wire service reports will more and more resemble Pravda."
Sorry TP, but there appears no longer to be any appreciable difference between TASS, AFP, AP, or Pravda, for that matter.
CBCpravda reporting on the protests for Bushs visit not his speech.
I could write an article for the propaganda end of the lieberal party.
use these words,
"critics say"
"Harper regime"
"lactating mothers"
"alleged Omar Khadr"
"mid wifery"
"pay for profit healthcare"
"gimme more money"
CBCpravda All Lieberal All the Time.
"Papers aren't dying (at least solely) because of their leftiness. They're dying because their ad revenue dried up"
Their ad revenue is drying up because their readers are going elsewhere. The best policy at this point is obviously to insult half of their readers in one last vainglorious effort to game one last election. Well they gamed the election, good for them. Don't let the door slam you in the butt, PI.
AP is more of a Democrat run shill that a "state run shill" as they still unerringly take the Democrat line even when they are out of power.
Speedy: "Advertising. It's the engine of the MSM ..."
Yes, but eyes/ears are the fuel. Why would any major corporation try to hoard something that is "unhoarable" like the news? ... it has no value after a very short period of time.
MSM has become JunkMail V2.0.
Tom Paine (7:04), the notion that we'd miss the wire services is premised on the assumption that the information they distribute is credible and accurate -- worthwhile -- and not be available elsewhere, none of which is true. I would suggest that as long as people are interested in Bufeck, Egypt, there will be information available online. Look at Iraq: embedded bloggers like Michael Yon, paid directly by his readers who are interested in his work, provides information that is more accurate and detailed that AP's by many orders of magnitude, and therefore more worthwhile and valuable to potential readers.
You're right that blogs frequently link to online versions of newspapers, in some cases, like Drudge, almost exclusively, but again, as more and more reporting moves online to non-newspaper sites and embedded bloggers, etc., these new sources will be increasingly linked to. Public information -- on political news/pronouncements, plane crashes, geopolitical events -- is not created by newspapers, they just report it. Everything else is just spin. You don't need a press pass to find out what crimes have been committed in your area, or to read the contents of a government's release, or read Hansard.
You point out that right-wing newspapers are suffering too, but I'd suggest it's the leftier ones -- the New York Times, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer -- that are in the most trouble. I was in the states for about a month recently and had daily access to the Wall Street Journal, and I was honestly shocked by the quality -- seriously. The reporters are extremely knowledgeable about what they're writing about, and seriously unbiased (un- editorializing) in the *news* coverage. It was this lack of an agenda in the news coverage that surprised me -- the reports basically reported on what various public officials said, and on the financial condition of states and counties, etc etc. If I showed a WSJ news report on Washington, say, to someone who didn't know where it came from, the only way he'd be able to tell it was not from a lefty paper would be by it's lack of an obvious agenda -- it was essentially factual in providing information. In -- again -- the NEWS coverage, there was nothing to indicate that the paper was anti-Obama or pro-Republican. News was news, and editorials were clearly delineated as being such, unlike, say, at the NYT, which combines the two into one and then pretends they're just giving the straight goods. I don't think it's any coincidence that the WSJ remains -- marginally -- profitable while agenda-rags like the Seattle PI and the NYT are tanking.
The bottom line is that the information age won't come to a grinding halt as newspapers die off -- remember, they've been supplanted by blogs and other online sources of information, to a large extent.
Regarding SDA's linking to newspapers: I'd like to point out that Kate most frequently links to newspaper reports to point out how ridiculous they are -- biased, editorializing, poorly written and selective with what facts they do and don't include. If the newspaper industry completely disappeared, there'd still be a lot of ridiculous things going on -- all those ridiculously biased individuals will keep being ridiculous in some other forum.
*News* doesn't die when a newspaper dies. And if AP stopped reporting on Israel, for example, as a result of their newspaper-borne funding drying up, I for one would not miss the bias at all.
Evan Solomon. Isn't he part of that tag-team on the nauseating CBC Sunday Night news show? The other half of the tag team may be a girl but Solomon is the one who is the ditz.
The more socialist we become the less we need advertising. It won't be long before we're standing in line for several hours just to buy a loaf of bread. We'll order our cars a couple years before production and will accept the car with the shortest waiting list.
Sound familiar? The leftoids are taking us in that direction and in the process are killing the need for mass advertising.
Typical of 'professional' journalists to try spin the story of their own demise.
"CBCpravda reporting on the protests for Bushs visit not his speech. CBC pravda All Lieberal All the Time."
Posted by: cal2 at March 17, 2009 8:59 PM
It was barf hour as CTV's Giggles Taber took over at 5:00 pm eastern.
The welfare cases protesting Bush in Calgary is headline stuff for CTV, what Bush actually had to say to Canadians doesn't even register in the minds of the likes of Taber or CTV.
Canadian MSM biased, insufferable, twisted, leftist information managers.
People will pay money for *news*. That is the lesson that history teaches us - and why the newspapers have names which include "courant", "observer", "intelligencer", "times".
Right now the vacuum is being filled with a number of small papers, which simply report stuff, and by news providers such as Drudge. If the news sources start drying up there will be a move (Michael Yon is a harbinger) online services to support real reporters.
It is easy, for example, to imagine SDA five years from now with a subscription component which pays for information from informants in , say, Saskatoon and Ottawa. The readership of SDA could support a couple of part-timers, which is what most newspapers have, in effect: "Canadian coverage of the Korean war was written in the bars of Tokyo", according to my army uncle.
Calgary's local news was all over the protesters. They featured one loudmouth,yelling the usual anti-bush crap. This guy looked like he just happened upon the demonstation as he was carrying a shopping bag. But it was NEWS. Like Joe above said,what the once most powerful and controversial man in the world for the past decade is not important.
Should have had 'had to say' in the above post. Also the local calgary news featured the 'Raging Grannies' auditioning for the protest on the news the night before. I didn't see them today,they must have not got hired. Yes,that is right,the oh-so-dear 'raging grannies' are available for hire to maximize media coverage of your protest,but don't expect to see that little fact on your next newscast.
I was in the states for about a month recently and had daily access to the Wall Street Journal, and I was honestly shocked by the quality -- seriously.
Hey, I've been saying that for ages here. The WSJ is a great paper. I'll go as far as saying that it's NA's best paper. I'll pay whatever they ask for a subscription. The demise of left rags is no mystery. Ever notice that even the lamest lefty has better sense than going after the Journal.
I suggest giving the WSJ as a Christmas gift to your kids. You'll be amazed how the generation that seemed lost to the dumb lefty mayhem of the MSM becomes rational, composed and truth seeking after a few months reading it.
What we are witnessing now is a technological revolution that is dramatically changing how information is gathered and distributed. The mass media of papers, tv and radio require large expensive infrastructure to deliver their content the masses. It requires much money and many people to keep it going. This means they must have content that a large audience wants and many advertisers are willing to pay for to reach that audience. The internet has destroyed this business model.
For example historically 40% of a paper's revenues came from classified ads. Craig's list provides this for free. Much of the content of papers such as sports scores, financial listings, crosswords, events calendars, and opinion are now provided instantly and for free on numerous websites often of much higher quality.
Most "news" that appears in papers is just hastily rewritten press releases or summaries of news conferences. There is very little original investigative journalism other than reprinting the "leaks" from political opponents. There is also very little in depth coverage of local events as anyone who attends the those events can attest to. By and large most modern journalists have no expertise to judge any stories dealing with business, economics, science, defense, newadministration, statistics, law, technology, etc.
When more of the dinosaur media die it will provide opportunities for new lean and mean ventures with a handful of people to act as a clearing house for press releases and summarize reports of events. Individual well read journalists like Michael Yon or Mark Steyn will find ways to develop revenue streams. Boring biased hacks will be washing dishes.
There is very little in today's paper that cannot be easily replicated on the internet for a fraction of the cost. John Galt will return.
Bottom line of my previous post - even if a paper was to have first class unbiased reporting with full spectrum opinion writers it could not compete against the much cheaper internet. The only papers around in a few years will serve niche markets such as un-wired seniors or un-wired travelers.
Penny, I didn't know how good a newspaper could be until I had a chance to read the WSJ every day -- I always read the front section cover-to-cover. It's just head and shoulders above every other newspaper I've ever seen.
I live out in the country so I can't get it -- not daily -- but if I lived in the city with a newsstand nearby I'd buy it every day.
To those who pose the question "What will blogs/Drudge/etc. do when there are no newspapers to link to", you wrongly presume that blogs in their current form are the end game.
The battle will have many stages. We are in stage 1.
Did someone say 'unwired travelers' ?
I cannot believe how, in my lifetime, the world has changed !!
Pick up a news paper here and there. Junk, bias. Endlessly flipping through hotel room TVs trying to find some news, anything. All dumbed-down. Phone home and ask someone. All at considerable expense in $$s and mental anguish - endless advertisements.
Voila !! Can you say iPod Touch ? For a measly $229 you can be connected - wirelessly. No subscriptions !! Open, free Wi-Fi is becoming common place. From weather satillite loops to the WSJ to sda to hotair to LG to email to ..
Came through Seattle today. Kate's post here (the PI tits up stuff)was front page all over the place. Would I put coin in the box to read about it ? Not a chance. sda and comments would and did deliver.
I sometimes have to pinch myself.
Ad revenue as several have mentioned is the key to any newspaper's survival. As an advertiser for the past 40 years off and on, mostly on, I can say this, I refuse to support those that are diametrical opposed to my views any more. I can also say this, it hurts and it costs me, but that's my choice.
This decline started long before the current crises and I know talking to others that advertise their feeling are pretty close to mine. Some of these same people have no choice but have cut their news paper advertising down and use flyers and mail outs more often.
Western Canadian,
Huh? Am I missing the point of advertising? or being in business?
on sda editorial comment would seem to be the responses to an item. some are short some are long and detailed. it seems like useful info to me. plus we get get to vent right away something you can't do with a paper no matter what foolishness you read.
I'm too lazy to check and must leave for work in a few minutes but ask yourself this:
Are rag sales like People Magazine, Sports illustrated, Video Gaming Mags or Maxim on the decline, flatlined or have they steadily increased while conventional paper news sources are all (Left and Right) decreasing?
Are the trend lines of increase/decrease somewhat coralated?
If the answer is somewhat yes then it should address my suspicion that in general the population is continuing it's intellectual and moral decline since the 1970's.
The only "news" that don't directly relate to pop culture and/or celibrity worship that people will seek is sensationalism:
- The Hudson river plane crash.
- The Mexican bus tragedy.
- The polar ice melting (Even if it's not true)
No indepth, serious and thought provoking pieces of journalism for stories that can truly affect ones life in short or long term is worth return on investment anymore. Except in book form or the quicker more cost efficient internet.
Even a public financed news organisation like CBC who use to and still do this kind of quality in depth reporting (even if left leaning in it's message) seems to have very few interested: Only 1 in 12 Canucks watches the Ceeb anymore and that's probably the Simpsons is on afternoons and Hockey Night...
"News" is as safe and shallow as a toddlers splash pool anymore.
It's the true thinkers that are "Not waiting for the asteroid", thinkers are a dying breed:
If there's no demand, there's no supply.
Newspapers and television news are old ideas, and they are dying which is good. Why should I be forced to read the opinion of a columnist when he/she is spouting rubbish and lies?
There are plenty of good sources for deep thinking. As you yourself said, books are one. And some blogs, including Kate's, often provide much more insightful opinion than I have ever found in any newspaper.
There will always be the gossip and sensationalism market. That will never go away. But without a doubt we have far more choices now to obtain informed news than we ever had before.
Well said Penny and EBD. Good straight reporting, no bias, no bull is all we ever ask for and should expect. I too cancelled the Star after 42 years and they keep calling and asking me to take it back but refuse to listen when I tell them I quit it because of it's relentless Left wing bias. Between them and the CBC it's no wonder the Yanks think us all commies!
BTW, if you like the WSJ you would love the reporting done by the Christian Science Monitor. They actually had a subscription interweb edition many years ago which I received in pdf format every day in my inbox. They recently abandoned their presses and went all internet as well and I wish them luck..
Don't be put off by the name. There is no religious filter here or religious slant. These folks just report the news from all over the world with zero bias. A great news organization.
Tom
You're almost right, but see:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=1464
Somebody did notice!