Then you have a choice, provide something people are willing to pay for, or get a job. Your decision. I’m ’subsidized’, so I can fart around. But the audition is hard, and people have died waiting for a favorable finding on their petition. Actually making a living at blogging requires hard work, talent, and perseverance. You’ve got a lot of competition out there, and you’ll never dominate the way some did back in the early days. Build an audience, accept advertising, and put out your own line of products via Lulu and CafePress. Then your journalism and pontificating will support you.

Yes! And, now that many of them are being laid off, we’ll soon see to whom “blame” really should be assigned. Many of those leaving newspapers today aren’t ready to give up on journalism. They recognize that even if the papers have failed, there is still and always will be a tremendous amount of money to be made in the news business — once it is freed of its shackles to the printing press. Many of today’s “laid off” will view their severance packages as “startup capital” and will become tomorrow’s entrepreneurs. In time, they will become leaders of successful, profitable news and information businesses.

The problem isn’t the journalists, it isn’t that “news is free”, it isn’t the Internet. The problem is that the newsPAPER business is tied to a legacy technology and legacy financial structures. At the same time that we’ve seen the value of newspapers decline, we’ve seen the value of and audience for news and information grow dramatically. Many of those laid off today will one day be quite thankful that they were given the opportunity to be part of building a new news and information industry.

bob wyman

At least there is archive.org to show just how competitive many newspaper websites were way back in the late nineties even.

Bob Wyman (love the blog name btw!) nails the first Internet driven news event for me. This is old news to many.

I maybe in your ignore list now Jeff, I’m not sure.

But I am secure in knowing that of the many, many people losing their jobs and careers in the midst of this ongoing revolution – a revolution I feel part of as an early adopter, promoter, evangelist, software engineer, blogger and more – there are thousands that do *not* deserve blame for what is going on.

I WILL NOT thumb my nose at them.

They fought, and in many places continue to fight, to drive business and culture changes in organizations that still have relevant value in a world where we are no better informed then we were 10 years ago according to Pew.

Change is life. But the big story here isn’t in the numbers of people who willfully looked the other way. There was some. But not the vast majority of people I worked with in the trenches at Philly.com.

Hell no.

And my heart goes out to them who fought (and continue to fight) with everything they have – to turn their ship around from the glacier that Shirky is right to indicate.

You know, I called bullshit on Rosenbaum for his characterizations of you as well from my personal blog. He did far more harm then good.

But I’ll call bullshit on Clay and you both on the idea that no one has been “caught up in this great upheaval”. I’m a big fan of Clay Shirky. I share his writing with folks at work all the time and I’ve actually quoted him to you in various responses to you over the years.

There have been many newspaper folks fighting for change in that industry over the past ten years.

They’ve worked very hard to do just what you suggest:

“All of us related to journalism must accept responsibility for and learn from the past if we have any hope of being part of the future (or others will see the opportunity, as they are).”

You’ve met them. Every once and a while you do talk about them. But fighting for change from the inside doesn’t work as well as a narrative. It doesn’t stick for some reason.

While I still agree with your overall points – the casting of blame squarely at ourselves for our fates is Web-tech ethic – and you’ve embraced it.

“Journalism isn’t dying. Yes, Virginia, it’s changing” and that *is* what is important.

We’ve moved from cassettes to CDs, to MP3s, but music still goes on.

Who moved the cheese man. Who moved the cheese!

1995 was the year when even the die-hards should have finally realized that the Internet was going to kill off the newspaper business as we knew it then. The key event was the Oklahoma CIty Bombing in April of 1995 — the first “internet news event”. By that time, we already had a large number of people regularly worrying about and discussing the demise of the newspaper business on the online-news mailing list.

bob wyman

They consistently cut back in areas that effect quality content, then cut again when circulations drop!

Yes there is a constant and steady evolution towards online media, but there is a loyalty, especially to regional content, with the consumers of news.

Mobile will fill the whole left by print operations.

Do we really think that all media today is, is:
“Distribution systems. That is all broadcasters ever were. And that’s all the internet is and will ever be.”

If that’s the case – I wonder where media lost it’s way? It seems like there were better intentions at some point…

Information is only power if it is hard to find and easy to hold, but in an arena where it is as fluid as water, value now has to come from elsewhere.

An excellent piece; thanks for linking to it.

Distribution systems. That is all broadcasters ever were. And that’s all the internet is and will ever be.