Deprecated: Function add_option was called with an argument that is deprecated since version 2.3.0 with no alternative available. in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5673

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php:5673) in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-content/plugins/all-in-one-seo-pack/app/Common/Meta/Robots.php on line 87

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php:5673) in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Tear Down That Wall! Chronicling the Decline of Newspapers and the Rebirth of Journalism Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:35:17 +0000 hourly 1 By: kenjiro Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:35:17 +0000 I agree that the wall should be broken, and that the journalists the big boys and girls, they can create, wear hats and I ran across an interview with the great Bob Garfield, ad critic analyst for ABC News that he spoke. symbiotic relationship between media and marketing and where things are moving.

By: Gary Warner Sat, 23 Oct 2010 04:01:25 +0000 Advertisers have a name for it when they can get media to combine editorial and business considerations. It’s called “earned advertising.” Why buy an ad when you can get some “synergy” with a media company that puts your product/service/political position on the front page or home page? It’s not just bad journalism. It’s bad business. Why buy an ad when for a fraction of the cost, you get media’s prime real estate. “Entrepeneurial” journalism that gets into bed with advertising is just advertorial. And once the advertiser has used it up and destroyed the credibility of the venue, they’ll kick it to the curb. Suicide.

By: msbpodcast Fri, 15 Oct 2010 15:19:42 +0000 So what did the NYTimes do today? (Friday October 15, 2010) GAVE away their iPad app.

I guess later they hope that they can charge for content, or throw in the towel and hope for a federal/state/local bailout.

That’s about as smart as Bernankey’s money policy.

The banks aren’t lending despite historically low rates, so lets lower them even further, and allow the banks to not need to lend out money to show a profit for even longer.


By: Ally Moore Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:12:16 +0000 I agree that the wall should be torn down and that journalists are big boys and girls; they can handle wearing both hats. I ran across a great interview with Bob Garfield, an advertising critic an analyst for ABC News, where he talks about the symbiotic relationship between media and marketing and where things are heading. I’ll include the link. It’s definitely worth watching.

By: Joe Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:03:31 +0000 A rather interesting example of a somewhat different business model seems to be the
Global Post, an online publication started last year. Access is free with subscriptions as options:

By: Michael Dare Tue, 12 Oct 2010 03:43:45 +0000 “Are advertisers such a corrupting force that they must be prohibited from any contact with the people who create the product they support with their ad dollars?” Absofuckinglutely. Let’s take Hollywood. You think the guy selling the film ads can be the film critic? Are you nuts? You think it’s beneath film studios to cancel thousands of dollars of advertising if they don’t like a review? Or let’s say you review cars and Ford lends you their latest with the hint that if they like the review, you might get to keep it. There’s a reason I trust Consumer Reports more than Car and Driver. Consumer reports accepts no advertising. The standard is that editorial is worth ten times more than advertising, i.e. your average reader is ten times more likely to believe nice things from a restaurant review than from a restaurant advertisement. Advertisers ALWAYS want a quid pro quo with editorial, but news is what people DON’T want you to know. It’s the opposite of advertising. Tearing down the wall is the death of objectivity.

By: msbpodcast Tue, 12 Oct 2010 02:16:48 +0000 Information silos are the only way to make money for news reportage organizations.

Finding people who would rely on your information is <bnot the problem.

With world wide advertising/promotion for your apps, announcing the specifics of your particular silo to search engines, you should be able to recruit buyers for the app.

They just need to be interested enough in the reportage organization coverage of the silo to buy the coverage for a given period of time.

Think of “Women’s Wear Daily” as a readership supported journal charging $25.00/quarter. Now apply the economies of scale to essentially free dissemination/distribution of content.

Now go forth and just do it.

By: msbpodcast Tue, 12 Oct 2010 01:51:12 +0000 Problem is that business doesn’t need ANY reportage, it needs:
a place for good PR that IT writes and controls,
a place to have product announcements and
a place for favorable product reviews.

Business couldn’t give a fig for good reportage. In fact its quite hostile to it.

The essence of good reportage is the unvarnished truth.

Business doesn’t like the unvarnished truth. It wants to apply their own varnish.

Reportage as a money making venture is pretty much over.

It coexisted and can still coexists with commerce only when the reportage exists in an almost separate sphere from the area of business.

How many articles on slave conditions in sweat-shop garment factories have been carried by “Women’s Wear Daily”?

How many articles about the hazards of shoddy medical treatment are broken by medical journals?

How many [shoddy industry “I” practice] articles are covered by [industry “I” covering organization]?

Publish a newspaper?

Find yourself a techie and pay to have an app written for the various iPhone, iPad, Android, Nokia platforms available.

Get out of print and get off the web, now.