Pay-to-play is one way to help save newspapers — I read this column by the once normal columnist David Lazarus and all it did was prove to me that people in the news business who should be on top of trends are apparently so isolated from reality that they cannot see straight let alone inform the public.
excerpt:
My thinking is that this is approaching a life-or-death struggle for newspapers, and an antitrust exemption may be the only way that the industry can smoothly make the transition to a digital future. Put simply, we need to charge a fair price for our products, and we need to do so together.
Barring that, I agree with Kirtley at the University of Minnesota. If newspapers aren’t going to collectively reach into the pockets of online readers, they should at least focus their attention on other Internet players that are profiting from newspapers’ content.
First off, there are the aggregators, sites like the Drudge Report and Huffington Post that pull together stories from a wide array of media sources (and charge advertisers a fee to appear beside links to content that they had nothing to do with creating).
Just as Viacom is arguing that Google/YouTube shouldn’t have unfettered access to clips from “The Daily Show,” MTV and other copyrighted material, newspapers should insist that a licensing fee be paid for aggregators to have access to their content. Then there are the blogs and other online venues that piggyback on the work of the “mainstream media” that they frequently deride as antiquated and obsolete.
I just wish that someone would implement some of these ideas so the entire structure of things could collapse and we could rebuild sensibly. First of all you should note that newspapers are still one of the highest margin businesses in the world often making 20-percent, albeit with declining revenue. The revenue is declining though because the product is cheapened. Which makes it decline more. So it gets cheapened further.
The fact of the matter is this trend began before the Internet when the newspapers were once before relieved of anti-trust regulation with various JOA’s (joint operating agreements). That’s when the slide began as newspapers split revenues and could begin to cheapen the product and coast along as price-fixed duopolies. In the few cities were competition continued such as New York, the slide was nothing like in places such as San Francisco with a major JOA. Now Lazarus wants more anti-trust relief so the news sources can lock down their online content altogether. To hell with outside links and modern social online networking. Everyone is a thief! Hey David, when you are done at the Chron, the RIAA is looking for some writers too.
Cripes.
“I just wish that someone would implement some of these ideas so the entire structure of things could collapse and we could rebuild sensibly.”
I agree, John! I wish they would get off the pot and quit threatening. Then they will see that information is free!
Question: Do Newspapers make the news or do they just report on someone elses actions? I’m going to sue everyone that watches anything I do during the day.
Or, are they just blogging to paper?
Do they really add anything to the human genome?
He is missing a large point. Its called “alternative media”. Its about being spoonfed the crap that they want you to see, while ignoring more important issues. Maybe if they went back to being hard news journalists, they would have credibility again.
I’m fortunate enough to have a friendly working arrangement with a local newspaper that [1] sees the writing on the wall; [2] did so early enough to develop an excellent online edition and [3] staffed it with professionals with online experience rather than trying to kludge together a crew of dullards like Lazarus.
I expect they’ll be around and profitable long after lower-case-twits are gone and forgotten.
I can assure you they are using the clips as “fair use.” All the news guys take each others clips all the time. But these are just short clips not whole long pieces.
I have always maintained that content is free. You can get material on any subject, from particle physics to porn, for just the time to search for it. What people pay for is filtering. The content generators need aggregator sites as their readership trusts the editors there to find and provide content that appeals to them.
Most of the news comes from a couple of sources like ap and reuters reporter then it is syndicated. The same holds true for photo images.
Looks like the big ball of fun is starting to unravel. It all boils down to selfish greed.
Must we should coin every breath we take. Every word we utter or repeat.
Bloggers are a pain in the big guys but it gives their little guy a chance to be heard.
Eventually all the content we record will be controlled under digital rights management.
Talk about “pulling together stories from a wide array of media sources and charging advertisers a fee to appear beside content that they had nothing to do with creating,” that’s exactly what a newspaper does every day.
Why aren’t newspapers charged for publishing the photos of a rush hour car crash or a burning house, or for a writing a story about the shallow graves out back behind the shed? They didn’t create the content by overindulging at happy hour and jumping behind the wheel, smoking in bed, or getting fed up with the kids on my lawn. Newspapers themselves are the biggest example of aggregators of content they didn’t create.
I fear the roll of paper became the series of tubes as newspapers stood flat-footed and watched the dump truck full of CD’s drive off into the sunset.
oh the irony… google being sued for stealing by the biggest thief of the age… (we dare not speak his name or he be sueing us) only in good… old… america… where you only have to 18 to go die for oil but 21 to go drink a beer with your dear old dad….. god i love what they have done to country!!!!! oh well.. i better get back to my spanish lessons… vio con dios muchachos….
Newspapers don’t need an anti-trust exemption. they already have one. It’s called the first amendment. They already have a lot of other protections… weekly newspapers under 5,000 circulation are exempt in many state from paying minimum wage. Many states exempt newspapers from telemarketing laws.
In reference to No. 9, newspapers are not charged to photographic anything that happens in a public place. U.S. residents have NEVER had an expectation of any kind of privacy in a public place.
What is the crack cocaine of the digital age?
Opium… Other Peoples Intelectual Material (OPIM)
To find out who is addicted…”follow the money”
Deepthroat
AKA
the nut
quoting from TechCrunch by Michael Arrington in a story by Nick Gonzalez March 15
“This morning Grouper sent social search engine Searchles a C&D letter. Grouper doesn’t like Grouper videos being streamed on the site’s new Searchles TV product. Grouper’s main complaint deals with the re-skinning of the the videos in the Searchles player, which removes their branding and feedback features.”
Notice that Grouper, “doesn’t like Grouper videos being streamed on Searchles TV product.”
Apparently greed, avarice and stupidity aren’t the exclusive realm of the dinosuar print media.
the nut
quoting from TechCrunch by Michael Arrington in a story by Nick Gonzalez March 15, 2007 (www.techcrunch.com)
“This morning Grouper sent social search engine Searchles a C&D letter. Grouper doesn’t like Grouper videos being streamed on the site’s new Searchles TV product. Grouper’s main complaint deals with the re-skinning of the the videos in the Searchles player, which removes their branding and feedback features.”
Notice that Grouper, “doesn’t like Grouper videos being streamed on Searchles TV product.”
Apparently greed, avarice and stupidity aren’t the exclusive realm of the dinosuar print media.
the nut
#9 – Why aren’t newspapers charged for publishing the photos of a rush hour car crash or a burning house, or for a writing a story about the shallow graves out back behind the shed? They didn’t create the content by overindulging at happy hour and jumping behind the wheel, smoking in bed, or getting fed up with the kids on my lawn.
So if I put my neighbor’s car on fire, I got the right to the story and images? Thieves and murderers would make become the new upperclass… 😉
#8 – Richard, if I want to visit your site, I’ll click on your name. No need for the constant self promotion inside your posts. 😉
—
What Lazarus is missing is that people expect news on the net to be free and readily available. After all, the newspapers get money from the advertisement, and the delivery is pretty close to nothing compared to the paper version.
From the article:
“The advertising model looks appealing now, but do we want our future to depend on that single source of revenue?”
Yeah, depending on one source of revenue is really a stupid thing to do. Everyone should avoid that… Wait a fucking minute, that’s exactly what Newspapers are doing RIGHT fucking now! Existing on advertising! What a fucking moron!
“What happens when somebody develops software to filter out advertising — TiVo for the Web?””
Where the fuck has he been in the last 7 years?! He’s never heard of ad-blockers?!
“The other way around the legal problem, Markham said, would be for the newspaper industry to apply to Congress for an exemption from antitrust laws.”
Or to put it in layman’s terms: “Our business model is crap so we have to have laws in place to keep it alive!”
“First off, there are the aggregators, sites like the Drudge Report and Huffington Post that pull together stories from a wide array of media sources”
Yeah, having readers directed to your site for free is such a fucking pain!! Exactly how does he expect readers to find his stories?! Does he think that people simply type random url addresses and read the result?! God, what a fucking idiot! The web is a fucking WEB!!! We find content through other content. That’s the fucking way it works!
“Just as Viacom is arguing that Google/YouTube shouldn’t have unfettered access to clips from “The Daily Show,” MTV and other copyrighted material, newspapers should insist…”
Or to put it in layman’s terms: “Because Viacom is doing something stupid, we should jump on the stupid bandwagon and earn a living via pointless and harmful litigation!”
I’m going to make this perfectly clear: Unless you are an attorney, LITIGATION SHOULD NEVER BE YOUR BUSINESS MODEL!!!
Just send everyone letters threatening to sue. It beats developing or marketing real products! Much better margin!
Gonna get rid of that spam by some life insurance shill? Gawd spammers are obnoxious. [done]
As for this guy, he’s like the mainstream media he works for. So out of touch with the concerns of actual people he doesn’t even know he IS out of touch. Yeah. That’s the kind of idiot I want to depend on for news.
I apologize Jägermeister,
I thought newspapers started to decline when TV got big. People started watching the network news instead of getting the afternoon paper. As a result in most markets the afternoon papers died or went morning; people would only subscribe to one morning paper, and so in most markets today there is only one (non-local) newspaper.
The golden age of newspapers had intense competition among 3, 4, or more daily papers who would raid one another’s reporters, try to get on top with sensational stories (inventing them when needed) and rabble-rousing against corrupt corporate practices and the ‘corruption’ of political bosses (though only of the bosses of the other party, never the party a particular paper supported). In short, newspapers were a lot more like cable news networks (Fox in particular).
Once newspapers became a monopoly in most markets, they discovered the religion of “journalism” and reporters thought they had to go to college to learn how to be “journalists” and papers got duller ‘n anything. A lot of the bias is still around, just hidden between the lines, and as a consequence a lot less entertaining.
Of course, the sorry state of American education has led to most citizens being half illiterate, which doesn’t help the situation.
#11 That’s entirely my point. I see the Internet as equally a public place with no expectation of privacy for publicly available content. I don’t believe it’s OK to scrape and republish, but it sure is OK to explain, caption, and link to publicly available content. In the real world, again, that’s exactly what newspapers do every day.
#20 — that pretty much summarizes things.
psst!
Information Is Free
pass it along …
#16, SN,
You have such a way with words. You sold me. ;-{D