I like newspapers. I used to love newspapers, but we’re growing apart — farther apart every day.
While I don’t make a conscious effort to pick up the paper anymore, I still read a lot online and I do my best to refer other people to important or interesting articles. And even when I’m advocating progress away from old-media-business models, I’ve gone out of my way to point out the special merits of newspapers and the positive role they have played (and still might) in our society.
But every time I read a biased, feeble-minded poorly considered defense of newspapers that tries to ridicule or villify new technologies, I’m pushed farther away. [I crossed-out "feeble-minded" because I try, whenever possible, not to attack people but rather criticize what they do or don't do. This one slipped in by mistake -- a moment of feeble-mindedness on my part, perhaps.]
Yesterday it was Richard Cohen in the Washington Post. The specific topic is how Obama intends to break through the groupthink “bubble” that surrounds presidents, insulating them from dissenting opinions and perspectives. Obama says he’s going to use his Blackberry to try and cut through it. Cohen says, ”It won’t work,” seeming to assume that Barack Obama is technologically handicapped and doesn’t know how to read news on his Blackberry (tip Yglesias). From there the column descends into schlocky sentimentalism about families passing sections of the paper ’round the breakfast table, with no hard argument or positive suggestion within sight. In fact, the column demonstrates a pretty good case against newspapers.
It’s a eulogy. I now see what these defenses are about: reminiscence of something that is already gone, and resignation to something that is already here but not yet understood.
It isn’t a mere coincidence that I’m coming to this realization hot on the heels [see -- just writing about newspapers makes me use tired old newspapery cliches!] of the Tribune Co. bankruptcy and then the announcement that the Detroit Free Press will cut delivery down to three days a week (also see James Surowiecki’s article in the current New Yorker). Now I see that Sun Media has announced even more job cuts — 600, or 10% of their non-mailroom workforce — which will affect London’s own Free Press.
I’ve been itching for weeks to write a rant blasting Sun Media for its abominable online presence, which is now several generations of technology behind the industry leaders and seems to have no hope of catching up. Now it seems a little cold-hearted, but I can’t hold back any longer. Some people high up in that company seem to be waiting for the whole “information superhighway” thing to blow over. The editor-in-chief here in town indicates he’s one of them in the comments of his own blog post:
I too wonder about the usefulness of blogs, the extent to which they contain any primary research, and how much real information they convey. And I too wonder about a world without newspapers, when and if that happens, and how we will operate the computers of the future. But I’m afraid I haven’t any real answers. The industry, and the world, are moving too quickly to predict what will happen.
It’s clear he’s only thinking of a narrow field of blogs, the ones like Huffington Post and Daily Kos that aspire to steal the bread and butter from newspapers. But if he looked at the excellent selection of economics blogs (as I pointed out in the comments of his blog a while back), he’d recognize that some blogs exceed newspapers in their ”usefulness,” “primary research,” and “real information.” Here’s what the Boston Globe reported:
The blogs offer a rolling crash course in economics as authoritative as any textbook, but far more accessible. It’s a conversation that’s simultaneously esoteric and irreverent, combining technical discussions of liquidity traps and yield curves with profane putdowns and heckling headlines. In the process, the bloggers have helped to democratize policy making, throwing open the doors on the messy business of everything from declaring a recession to structuring the most expensive government bailout in history.
Then it occurred to me that there are fields in which blogs stand out even more — and ironically, these are precisely the fields that the old newspaperfolks ought to follow in order to be informed about the changes affecting their industry: communications technology and user experience.
Nobody covers breaking tech news as effectively as blogs and other new media outlets. Press releases and “leaks” are going to blogs like TechCrunch and Endgadget before mainstream outlets because the big media organizations can’t muster the same tenacity, immediacy, and passion in their coverage (the same thing is happening with celebrity gossip blogs like TMZ and PerezHilton). Then when you include the commentary and discussion from the likes Tim O’Reilly et al, not to mention Robert Scoble’s tireless commenting on Twitter and FriendFeed, it’s clear that not only is there “primary research” on blogs, but readers can observe and participate in the developments first hand. I was going to say “straight from the horse’s mouth” but the experience is even more primary and immediate than that.
Perhaps a better demonstration of that principle — that blogs don’t just report but actually do — is the practice of co-creation, by which producers and providers generate feedback from users (formerly known as viewers) who participate in shaping the content. See the Late Night with Jimmy Fallon video blog as an example: they’re sharing every aspect of the show’s day-to-day development before going on-air officially in March, using comments and questions to find opportunities for improvement — or at least that’s ostensibly why.
Although some of the feedback may be useful, another purpose of the video blog is to generate attention and interest — building an audience of people who feel a more personal connection to the show, and are more likely to put the good word out on the street, and stay devoted for longer.
This co-creative, “crowdsourcing” approach has been developed and promoted by companies that specialize in ”interaction design,” or “user experience design,” such as Adaptive Path, Critical Mass, and Experientia. This is the other field where blogs don’t just contain primary research but primary doing. These practices aren’t just new, they’re still works-in-progress, and the professionals who promote them have used blogs as platforms for cutting edge conversations (or “bleeding edge,” as they say now) — blogs that people in the newspaper business can and should be using.
And it turns out that IDEO — perhaps the leading design company in the world — will be working with the Detroit Free Press on their new, precedent-setting business model. IDEO understands interactions and user experience as well as anyone, and they practice what they preach (here’s IDEO Labs blog; here’s their brainstorming group on Facebook; here’s the blog that CEO Tim Brown is using to do research for a book about design thinking; and for good measure here’s the personal blog of another IDEO’er Diego Rodriguez).
Anyone who has followed those blogs would not say something like, “I too wonder about the usefulness of blogs, the extent to which they contain any primary research, and how much real information they convey,” and they almost certainly wouldn’t say, ”I’m afraid I haven’t any real answers.” Not only do those blogs help demonstrate some of the answers, but the people who write and comment on them are actively making the answers articulate. They don’t just contain primary research, they are primary research — exaclty the kind of research that newspapers need to understand in order to stay relevant.
Some of my answers are in this previous post; I also have some newer, more refined answers that I’ll work out here in the next few days.
[Update: that new post is here.]
Preview: The new business models will form around, 1) national multi-media portals that combine online, TV, and mobile use, 2) community papers that consolidate all of our junk mail with puzzles and local news, 3) a few global organizations covering hard news, evolving from wire services, 4) editorials and commentary emerging from ongoing work at think tanks and research institutes, and 5) freelance intermediaries and enthusiasts like me (I mean, better than me).
As businesses, #1 will work much like cable TV does now, with subscription plus advertising, #2 pays for itself, I’d be willing to pay for #3 (especially if that makes me licensed to be an effective #5), and #4 is largely non-profit, paid for by big donors and grants, or by patents or consulting or whatever their research is actually meant for. All of these already exist, but there are also way too many outlets that try to be all of these things and do none of them well. That’ll sort itself out.
{ 3 comments }
Brian,
As the person who was hired at the Free Press over the summer to help ensure that we evolve from a newspaper company to a social media fueled news media company, I very much welcome your criticism of our current standing. I would, however, invite you to take a peek at my blog where I attempt to articulate what we’re doing in the social media space and how our local paper is evolving.
Do we have a long way to go? There is no question. But I firmly believe that we have taken steps in the past 6 months that will allow us to bring the news to Londoners in the way that they want it, no matter what that looks like.
Regards,
Steve Groves
Director of Internet Media, The London Free Press
@SteveatLFPress
Steve- Thanks/sorry. Glad you responded because it’s encouraging to see the work you’re doing “behind the curtain.” London seems to be perfect geographically for great community-focused and user-driven media. I hope my criticism will be read in the context of the very high hopes I have. London can be a leader but we need leaders within London. Anyone who takes this challenge on gets my best regards — but no free lunches!
And by the way, I was thinking about it some more and remembered that IDEO, which I praised so highly, has been a relative newcomer to social media as well. They only introduced their company blogs when they redesigned their site a few months ago. There’s a lot to be said for deliberation and restraint when adopting new technology, but IDEO already understood and exemplified a very open, progressive mindset; very few organizations are able to recognize the most opportune moment to adapt and then execute so effectively. This is getting me into another, complementary discussion about pragmatism, again…
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 4 trackbacks }