Comments on: Kinsley nails it again

By: David Irwin

David Irwin — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 03:25:29 +0000

The kind of news a lot of citizens in the US are getting now is the sort of stuff that leads people to go out and buy a lifetime of ammunition for an AK-47. The piece on “All Things Considered” this evening interviewing the gun store owner made me sick. The right wing radio lock is warping the political dialogue in the US, and the death of newspapers ain’t gonna help that a bit.

Democracy is in trouble, no matter what arguments you make for the future of the internet. Local news coverage and important news on political issues simply is not going to get to the average Joe if newspapers die. If you are ok with that, then I suppose it’s ok to say, “Let them die.” I think that is dangerous.

By: Barney Lerten

Barney Lerten — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 06:28:38 +0000

Great question, Ken. And Jeff has been all over that particular well-trod mountain over the years.
He would argue that the definition of news is changing, whether we journalists want to believe it or not.

I’d say, for one example, that people want to know more of the good folks doing the right things in quiet fashion, right down the street, and less of the AIGs and the Blagojevichs of the world.

In other words, they want more hope in their news. I think they deserve that. Will they pay to read/view it? Hmm, good question. But I bet some reticent advertisers could be won over by it. Over time. If we have the time to get there.

And Brad, yep, you have to wonder how many jobs have been saved at newspapers by the blow-up of legal notices for foreclosures. Many more pages devoted to that than want ads, alas.

By: Michael Kinsley writes, Jeff Jarvis applauds « Virtualjournalist

Michael Kinsley writes, Jeff Jarvis applauds « Virtualjournalist — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:41:27 +0000

[...] post “Kinsley nails it again” (as in another nail in the newspaper industry coffin?) praises the Slate c0founder for his [...]

By: Ken Leebow

Ken Leebow — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:08:13 +0000

Interesting article, however, the larger issue is a simple one: What is news?

And, if you answer that one honestly, you’ll observe that much of what purports to be news is not. Thus, the Internet inputs have been able to take advantage of this.

By: Brad Haugaard

Brad Haugaard — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:34:25 +0000

Good article! But I think that indirectly, many state governments are already subsidizing newspapers by requiring businesses to publish their legal ads in paper publications.

I’m sure that at one time this made a lot of sense, but the logic of requiring businesses to publish notices in general circulation newspapers no longer holds as newspapers collapse and reach fewer and fewer readers.

With newspapers increasingly unable to reach a mass audience, these regulations are more and more just a subsidy for companies printing paper. And the sad part is that these same rules hinder newspapers from making the switch to the Internet. If they switch, they would lose this revenue.

I think it is time for state legislatures to change the rules to allow local Internet-only, general interest, publications to publish legal ads. It would ease the transition for newspapers and would give a boost to all local Internet journalism.