he is known for buying and then strip mining papers; gutting them from the inside and keeping the cash while killing the content -- 10 years before the internet came.
if this is who the industry has chosen to represent itself, it deserves to die
Perhaps they simply don't want the likes of Nick Denton and his giant oblong head and outsized, woman-fearing ego to use their content free of charge to make him even richer while he misrepresents his full-time employees as contract workers and rips off the state and the Fed on taxes and uses the proceeds to party like some 80's club kid and pays the expenses on a huge lifeless Soho apartment?
@ian spiegelman: Hey Ian, that's a good point. Some apparent full timers represented as independent contractors planned to do a class action lawsuit against the Portland Oregonian newspaper a while back. I don't know what happened next. But this seems like standard procedure for the entire industry, don't pay writers anything unless you're forced.
By golly, I've seen this movie before. It happened right here in River City!
There was this operating system called UNIX. Everybody ran on it, and lots liked it, then not so much of either. And so the operation stuck with the license became - what ese? - a patent troll. They tried to survive the same as any maggot by sucking up the blood of more successful companies which may or may not have infringed upon their precious OS, such as Linux. Now I think the Santa Cruz Operation is no more.
The difference, and it's a huge one, is that aggregators truly are living off the MSM. AP ain't just trolling.
But...Google news just aggregates stories, many of them from newspapers.
Don't get me wrong, the model has to change. But we still need local journalism. And I say this as PR flack who spends most of my time annoyed with them.
Shut up, Owen. You don't know what you're talking about. I know you're paid to have an opinion (regardless of its validity), but at least try to make it an informed one. Google is not making online news a profitable business. It's making online news aggregating a profitable business. I know it's been said before, but you don't seem to take the logic, but without news to aggregate, there is no Google news. For that matter, there is no Gawker (which, if it spared us these posts, would be the only happy byproduct). I don't know the answer for the coming economic model for news, but neither do you. So stop being so shrill and duncey (sic, I know, but it's the only word that seems fit).
Did it ever occur to them that Apple might be reaping more of those profits because consumers think the portable convenience of the iPod and the one-click simplicity of iTunes have more value than the time-filling music itself?
I don't think I get this, Owen. Without the music and Ricky Gervais' podcasts, why would I want iTunes or an iPod? I'll take my content in any form - I'd jack in the Apple stuff tomorrow if something takes my fancy (and if the person who bought me my iPod would deign to buy me something new). It's the stuff that plays that matters, not what I play it on.
The fact that you can now download iTunes onto any mp3 player, and not just one particular iPod, surely shows that the means of conveying are interchangeable, but if I want some proper old-school Britney, Miley Billy Ray Cyrus ain't gonna cut it.
OK, and once the newspapers die, who's going to write the stories? (No, not bloggers churning out copy in their parents' basement. I mean real reporters who do research, vet sources, travel to interview people, etc.)
A democratic society requires in-depth news reporting. Watergate FTW.
@Elliot Poger: Not all bloggers live in their parent's basements. Many bloggers are real live journalists! Or reporters who have been axed and still want to practice their trade. Never fear. The railroads were once the largest business in America..things change.
@Argy: The day will come when the good blogs will look alot like newspapers. There will be reporters and stuff and people will read them because we do like and need the news. No, that time is not now.
04/07/09
He is pure evil.
04/07/09
[en.wikipedia.org]
he is known for buying and then strip mining papers; gutting them from the inside and keeping the cash while killing the content -- 10 years before the internet came.
if this is who the industry has chosen to represent itself, it deserves to die
newspapers are dead. long live journalism.
04/06/09
Just a thought.
04/06/09
04/06/09
There was this operating system called UNIX. Everybody ran on it, and lots liked it, then not so much of either. And so the operation stuck with the license became - what ese? - a patent troll. They tried to survive the same as any maggot by sucking up the blood of more successful companies which may or may not have infringed upon their precious OS, such as Linux. Now I think the Santa Cruz Operation is no more.
The difference, and it's a huge one, is that aggregators truly are living off the MSM. AP ain't just trolling.
04/06/09
Towering incompetence.
Let's leave it at that.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
02/27/09
Don't get me wrong, the model has to change. But we still need local journalism. And I say this as PR flack who spends most of my time annoyed with them.
02/27/09
02/27/09
03/01/09
02/27/09
I don't think I get this, Owen. Without the music and Ricky Gervais' podcasts, why would I want iTunes or an iPod? I'll take my content in any form - I'd jack in the Apple stuff tomorrow if something takes my fancy (and if the person who bought me my iPod would deign to buy me something new). It's the stuff that plays that matters, not what I play it on.
The fact that you can now download iTunes onto any mp3 player, and not just one particular iPod, surely shows that the means of conveying are interchangeable, but if I want some proper old-school Britney, Miley Billy Ray Cyrus ain't gonna cut it.
02/27/09
A democratic society requires in-depth news reporting. Watergate FTW.
02/27/09
02/27/09
02/27/09
02/27/09