Editor’s Note
Back in the old days — that’s less than a decade and before there were such things as blogs and interactive conversations with readers — editors used to respond to their newspaper readers with an “editor’s note.” Sometimes it clarified a point made in a letter to the editor. Sometimes it offered a correction. Sometimes it was just a simple explanation. An editor’s note was a handful of sentences; maybe a four or five paragraphs. It was always a personal link between the editor and the reader. Only difference between it and today’s blog is the immediacy and the platform. Welcome to Editor’s Note.

“If GM disappears, there will still be cars…”

April 6th, 2009 at 12:27pm Linda Grist Cunningham

Michael Kinsley writes a weekly column for the Washington Post. I found this one online at washingtonpost.com. I share it with you via rrstar.com. Just another example of the changing information model…. Enjoy.

Here’s an excerpt for those who aren’t interested in the whole thing:

As many have pointed out, more people are spending more time reading news and analysis than ever before. They’re just doing it online. For centuries people valued the content of newspapers enough to pay what it cost to produce them (either directly or by patronizing advertisers). We’re in a transition, destination uncertain. Arianna Huffington may wake up some morning to find The Washington Post gone forever and the nakedness of her ripoff exposed to the world. Or she may be producing all her own news long before then. Who knows? But there is no reason to suppose that when the dust has settled, people will have lost their appetite for serious news when the only fundamental change is that producing and delivering that news has become cheaper.

Maybe the newspaper of the future will be more or less like the one of the past, only not on paper. More likely it will be something more casual in tone, more opinionated, more reader-participatory. Or it will be a list of favorite Web sites rather than any single entity. Who knows? Who knows what mix of advertising and reader fees will support it? And who knows which, if any, of today’s newspaper companies will survive the transition?

But will there be a Baghdad bureau? Will there be resources to expose a future Watergate? Will you be able to get your news straight and not in an ideological fog of blogs? Yes, why not — if there are customers for these things. There used to be enough customers in each of half a dozen American cities to support networks of bureaus around the world. Now the customers can come from around the world as well.

If General Motors goes under, there will still be cars. And if the New York Times disappears, there will still be news.


Entry Filed under: Uncategorized

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. Jeff Stewart  |  April 23rd, 2009 at 7:30 am

    There is an old saying that when railroad companies were confronted with the automobile, they continued to think they were in the railroad business, when they were really in the transportation business. Most failed to continue to exist.

    Today as newspaper companies are confronted with new, less expensive and more convienent ways of consuming news, is it important for them to remember that they are in the news business and not the paper printing business.

    In his book, Everything Is Miscellaneous, David Wienberger points out the economics of printed encylodepias were based on the scarcity of paper. The editorial process was built around the value of paper and not the cost of writers and editors. When the distribution model changes, the value propositions and business organization changes as well. Thus printed encyclodepias are basically extinct.

    In the newspaper business, the process of creative distruction is underway. The New York Times Company just reported a $74 million USD loss for Q1. They are burdened with $1.3 billion USD in debt. Ad revenues for Q1 alone are down 27% from last year. It will be interested to see if they survive as an organization much longer.

    But while the times are tumultuous, I fail to see why the future of journalism is bad journalism. The power of individuals to contribute is great… but the filtering processes will have to evolve. That is the subject of Wienbergers book if you are interested.

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed