Arianna Huffington testified today before the Senate Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet in a hearing on the “Future of Journalism.” The Senate was contemplating the future of news, particularly newspapers, and will consider what (if any) action Congress needs to take to save the industry. Those who testified include Marissa Mayer, Vice President of Search Products and User Experience at Google; lberto Ibargüen, CEO of the John S. And James L. Knight Foundation; David Simon, writer and producer of The Wire, and former Baltimore Sun employee; Steve Coll, former managing editor of The Washington Post; and James Moroney, publisher and CEO of The Dallas Morning News. You can see the transcripts of their testimonies here.
Huffington says in her testimony that traditional media has been afflicted with Attention Deficit Disorder, saying “they are far too quick to drop a story-even a good one, in their eagerness to move on to the Next Big Thing.” Online journalists, she says, have Obsessive Compulsive Disorder because “they chomp down on a story and stay with it, refusing to move off it until they’ve gotten down to the marrow.” She goes on to say that the two afflictions should be merged to produce optimal journalism.
Huffington maintains, as she has said before, that the future of journalism is based on a the link economy, search engines, online advertising, citizen journalism and foundation-supported investigative funds. She warns that if media doesn’t adopt these features, then they will have a tough time surviving.
David Simon, the creator of the popular HBO series “The Wire,” took a pot shot at bloggers, saying that they aren’t “in the trenches” like newspaper journalists so often are. He said he has never seen a blogger in a courthouse or bar with policemen (building relationships with sources), which is something that career newspaper journalists do and bloggers don’t. Whether he’d know a blogger if he saw one in a crowded courtroom is not something he addressed.
James Moroney, of the Dallas Morning News, suggests that Congress should create tax breaks for newspaper companies, relax antitrust laws so that newspapers can experiment with joint content distributions, and establish laws or regulations to prevent unpaid content distribution over the internet. These are really bad ideas.
Marissa Mayer defended Google and Google News (which was referred to as a parasite by Forbes CEO and Chairman, Jim Spanfeller) valiantly, saying that “Google News and Google search provide a valuable free service to online newspapers specifically by sending interested readers to their sites at a rate of more than 1 billion clicks per month. Newspapers use that Web traffic to increase their readership and generate additional revenue…” Google has been taking a beating lately from news organizations ranging from the A.P. to Forbes claiming that it is somehow “stealing” their ad revenues.
Can Congress save journalism? Does it even have to?
“they chomp down on a story and stay with it, refusing to move off it” … you mean like TwitterCrunch?
I have am immense amount of respect for true journalists that spend weeks on an assignment (checking facts, cold calls, interviews, notes) and then sending that story through 4-10 people (editors) before printing it and hopefully writing the story as a reporter and not adding their own opinion.
blogs and the internet in general is all about opinion these days and it’s hard to find a story that doesn’t have the author’s political opinion thrown in there. I think Newspapers should learn from the bloggers and bloggers should take a few cues from newspaper and broadcast journalists because, in my opinion, both sides are doing it wrong.
+1 more like +1000
journalists have always been bloggers. some good, some bad. they get mad because now anyone can be a journalist. many times freelance blogger comments are more credible than from a so-called self professed journalist. everyone is a digital media entrepreneur and everyone needs to get used to it. journalists, newpapers, magazines no longer have a corner on anything.
NewspaperLocator.com – Freedom of the People
Don’t confuse keeping a chronicle with journalism. And, not everyone can keep a readable chronicle.
Also, you are confusing the role of the journalist (or blogger) and the role of the publisher. You can write all you want, but if no one publishes it (paper or on the web), you are mute.
The US newspaper industry had to go through a period of “yellow journalism” to build a respected publishing industry. Blogs have yet to go through such a cleansing ritual.
aholelocator.com — look in the mirror
LocatorGuy is Arianna’s poolboy.
Eh, is she really implying that ONLY online reporters are maladjusted freaks?
Was gonna comment longer but there is an other blog that also need attention..
DJs are the best maladjusted freaks on Earth but big radio companies keep firing them.
“The Senate was contemplating the future of news, particularly newspapers, and will consider what (if any) action Congress needs to take to save the industry.”
I just don’t understand why the government has to save all these dying businesses. isn’t this action in itself bad business?
I equate proposed action to the car industry bailouts.
I live in new orleans. I’m still in reconstruction. 99% of the time, when things fall apart, people just try and get back to how things were instead of seeing it as a chance to reinvent. I’m glad some law makers understand this and have at least attempted to put stipulations in place to prevent the auto-makers from just rebuilding the same turds but I just hope they don’t find any wiggle room. at the end of the day, a pontiac aztec is still an undesirable turd. the people have spoken and it should stay that way.
in the same vein, newspapers need to evolve or fade out. just like anything else. tenure, tradition, nostalgia are not good enough reasons to force the tax-payers to sustain them through inevitable failure.
Agreed. Why are we (the taxpayer) spending money on them to figure it out? Shouldn’t they be figuring it out on their own? That’s what every small business in this country is doing right now.
And why in the hell are they taking Huffington’s opinion? Does her extreme political bias automatically make her an expert?
This is ridiculous if you ask me.
I find it alarming and distressing that established industries such as newspapers, record companies, and Hollywood think that they have the ‘right’ to lobby congress for special considerations in the law that allow them to continue with their broken business models.
The internet and web are an incredibly disruptive set of technologies that have made many old business models obsolete. I realize that this sucks for the old guard, but the development of new and different business models that replace them is the natural progression of things in a capitalist environment. Protecting failed business models with legislation helps no one, and is the last thing in the world that our elected leaders should be concerning themselves with right now.
Let the newspapers die if they can’t figure out how to survive in our new digital future. There are bright young minds out there with plenty of new ideas ready to replace them.
Spot on.
Newspapers (or at least their content) do provide a type of writing and investigation that the average blogger will never obtain.
But that doesn’t mean that journalists, either as individuals or as a collective, can’t make some money with their own blogs (or web sites).
The margins are lower, but they are still there to pay the salaries. Journalism will live on — the real question is who is going to filter the crap from the good solid news — bring the distinguished writers and reputable authorities to the top.
Let go Mav, you gotta let go!
The division between online and old school could not be clearer in these testimonies. I think Huffington’s model is the newspapers’ worst nightmare even though they themselves have done the exact same thing via wire services and syndication- aggregation has always been a print news model. Their diatribes against Google are equally ridiculous. Google should simply remove a major online paper from search results for a week and provide analysis of the loss in traffic and revenue this causes. This world changed a long time ago. No legal or financial bailouts for newspapers.
What amazes me is that American newspaper publishers ignore over and over again which newspapers are still making money and even gaining subscribers. They just except that if you live in their town that you’ll subscribe to their paper.
This is a brilliant speech given by a graphic designer from Poland, who’s not only kept the paper afloat, but actually gained in readership of their print newspaper because of simply redesigning the newspaper and giving readers what they want. Other papers in Eastern Europe are following this paper’s example and winning.
I believe that true news reporting has already died. I now need to research who owns what paper or website in order to determine if I can trust it as a news source. Most times I can’t even while considering the bias level. Almost all conservative outlets have devolved into yellow journalism tabloids. It’s sad, truly sad.
You have never had the level of virginity you treasure. Insert coin(s).
All conservative media outlets? Hmm, I’m pretty sure there’s only (1) out there, and they have the highest ratings between all of the major networks. Yet, so many people are complaining about bad journalism and traditional media dieing. Hmm, so what does that really say? We all know that the majority of media is liberally bias, and that the majority of traditional media is failing. Your comment has a very high level of ignorance to it.
I guess talking about what is going on with Twitter/on Twitter/about Twitter/[insert your favourite preposition here] Twitter is the kind of OCD common among online journalists.
Newspapers act like they are the only source of true journalism. We need journalist, not newspapers. I believe journalist can survive in the digital age, even flourish. Business is business, you take the good with the bad. I don’t expect anyone to bail me out if I’m in trouble, so why should newspapers?
Airline bailouts.
Hedge fund bailouts.
AUTO bailouts.
Shitty city government bailouts.
And now Newspaper owners, who have been extending their middle fingers to readers for decades (to their own peril), want bailouts.
And yet EVERYBODY anybody has ever talked has come out against against bailouts.
So, bailouts seem to be occurring without ABYBODY’s consent.
Nobody has any idea how to stop it.
I read an article newspapers want to block Google bots. They are working on technology to make more money from news and block out all freebies.
Google is also a member of the AP as I understand it. Somebody out there has better drugs.
Google does not provide their service for free. The company sells advertising to make money for its stockholders. The knowledge they gain from search is what enables Google to raise cash for stockholders.
In order to bring in those advertising dollars, Google and other search engines need newspapers as much as the newspapers need the search engines.
David Simon’s never heard of Groklaw? They’ve had people in courtrooms all the time.
mnvnmvbn
these remarks prove that Ariana Huffington is an idiot. Also, Marissa Mayers participating in a Senate Committee–makes me think it’s more for her own self-promotion than as a result of anything useful she could say about newspapers. She’s clearly enjoying media attention and half-fame.
I read my newspaper everyday. I am no Facebook or Twitter user or any of those social networking sites. I found that I am more informed about current affairs than some of my friends who participates in Facebook/Twitter/Social Networkings. Newspaper has more depth. Blogs are nice quick references, but to me, social media is no substitute for the depth that print media gives, at least not yet.
I agree. Newspapers are much more informative than blogs. I want actual news, not some commentary. If the nasa shuttle launches, i want to know about that, not some commentary about shuttles and whether they are good or bad.
I agree with the link economy idea because when I am reading an article that is meaningful to me, I will come across links within that article to continue feeding my interest in the topic. If the link doesn’t lead to another meaningful article, I’ll hit the backspace to find more links within the original article. So, yes, link economy is part of the equation.
Yes yES Si affirmative You got it! +1 Jon Anderson’s band! I agree!
Washing your hands all the time prevents the flu the journalist obsess over.
I am unsure if I really agree with Huffington that online journalists are the terriers of journalism. Yes, I agree that print has to get to the next big thing but that’s nothing new. Bloggers get a news story and then put their own spin on it, while otheres simply regurgitate a print journalists work. I am on David Simon’s side on this one.
I like Dallas Morning News idea of tax breaks for newspapers. It’s becoming ever clearer that readers don’t want to pay for content and subscriptions are notoriously difficult to get. A tax break would be great, but other industries who are in more need than newspapers may protest a move like this.
http://www.word...line-journalism
At the End of the day. No Bail Outs. Sink or Swim
If traditional media-ites are ADD, and bloggers are OCD, what does that make twitterers?
Bloggers aren’t “in the trenches” making friends and having beers with their sources?
Of course they are, they are just doing it online. They’re also meeting at conferences, talking via chats, they are interviewing each other, and otherwise creating relationships.
The newspaper industry is tanking because people want to read their news in another way. Which doesn’t mean they just want to read it on their computer, people want to read news written about the topics they are interested in and even written by someone like them. Bailing them out just postpones the inevitable.
“… traditional media has been afflicted with Attention Deficit Disorder, saying “they are far too quick to drop a story-even a good one, in their eagerness to move on to the Next Big Thing.” Online journalists, she says, have Obsessive Compulsive Disorder because “they chomp down on a story and stay with it, refusing to move off it until they’ve gotten down to the marrow.””
I think the reason for that is simply that traditional media has only so much space that can be dedicated to a piece of news, having at most only one print publication a day. By the time the next publication comes, they would have to move on to new news. Online journalists on the other hand, can just keep posting their opinions/write-ups by the minute, include discussion from others and basically talk a piece of news to death. Basically, they can have as much space as they need to talk an issue through. I don’t think print journalists should be trying to draw the line between print and online so clearly, turning it into some competition but rather be working together towards providing both print (objective facts) and online (space for discussion and opinions) spaces for consumers.
http://www.reas...ow/1003180.html
“When Ford and Buick began assembling their “horseless carriages” at the start of the 20th century, the nation suddenly faced the reality that countless workers who built and assembled carriages and stagecoaches would soon be added to unemployment rolls… The government could have stepped in to protect those jobs, but that isn’t the government’s, well, job (contrary to popular opinion). America, and the world, might have become a very different place had politicians thought it their duty to defend the stagecoach industry from collapsing in order to keep people employed and the economy ’strong.’”
“James Moroney, of the Dallas Morning News, suggests that Congress should …. establish laws or regulations to prevent unpaid content distribution over the internet”
Lol, I know it’s below the belt to make fun of the gentleman’s name but with ideas like that, Mr. MORONey is definitely asking for trouble