Recapping the News Dive

It's an unfortunate trend, but a number of journalists have recently done a superb job providing an overview of the crippled state of the news industry. The latest recap comes from James Warren, a former managing editor and Washington bureau chief for the Chicago Tribune. Writing in The Atlantic, Warren explains the classified ad conundrum and revisits the flawed model for online revenue. He links to another fine piece from media guru Eric Alterman, who wrote last year in the New Yorker.

Warren now writes for some of the sites -- The Huffington Post and The Daily Beast -- that rely heavily on newspaper reporters for original content and will undoubtedly lose out if this content continues to diminish.

Reading articles about the decline of the news media is somewhat masochistic and, admittedly, even a tad narcissistic. But it's also important. Every once in awhile, we all need a little kick in the ass to remind us why we're still in the game.

The Sound of Silence

I had C-Span on standby. As today's historic inauguration played out on television, I was wary of commentators trying to talk over each other to score the best sound bite. Maybe I'd just watched too many Olbermann-Matthews co-anchor-a-thons over the summer.

But to my delight, the networks -- namely CNN and NBC, the channels I flipped between -- played Barack Obama day just right. Mostly silence during the big moments, filled with a little bit o' Brockaw nostalgia and Kearns Goodwin historical gravitas when the time called for it. There was no need for a replacement station.

I also had the pleasure of watching the inauguration proceedings with recent immigrants who were witnessing their first presidential celebration in America. It was a touching moment, and nice to see people who genuinely enjoyed the event. My article on the experience is here.

My favorite quote: “Before today I didn’t really feel like an American,” said Aden Mohamed, a native Somali who came to the United States two months ago. “Today, I feel like part of this country.”

Truly an amazing day for anyone covering or watching.

The Call for iNews

Last week, the New York Times' David Carr asked in a column whether the faltering newspaper business could take a page from Apple and invent an iTunes for news that would bolster companies' bottom lines. As Carr asks:

"Is there a way to reverse the broad expectation that information, including
content assembled and produced by professionals, should be free?"

The line of thinking is easy to follow: Readers, like listeners who were used to downloading music for free, can be retrained to pay for content. It doesn't sound absurd on its face. Newsgathering is often expensive if done right, and the cost of reporting just isn't being paid for by things like display ads.

But let's not forget the basic economic principle that says people typically won't pay for something once they've gotten it for free. Let's also remember that many music listeners were downloading with fear. They were concerned about legal ramifications of their actions and could be persuaded to pay for piece of mind. There's no such concern with reading news for free.

The answer to Carr's question is that, yes, some loyal readers would pay for the content. He points out that he subscribes to the Wall Street Journal online, even though he could get much of the same news by going behind firewalls. Problem is, Carr isn't your typical news consumer.

Then there's the issue of pricing. Apple is being lauded for changing the one-price-fits-all model of iTunes. But how would one set a pay scale for articles -- by author, publication prestige, article length?

And don't forget about the technology angle. In a response column to Carr's piece, Slate's Jack Shafer notes that "a flawed iTunes for news already exists." That is, Amazon's Kindle, which allows users to download paid subscriptions to the Times and other publications for a fee. Shafer rightly notes that the market for a reader isn't where it needs to be.

It's also worth mentioning that a sizeable number of newsies (whose careers may depend on a new business model for journalism) would likely be against the idea of charging for news online. There's a strong argument to be made for democratizing information -- and the iNews model would certainly be a step back.

So where does that leave us?

Likely with a compromise. Charging everyone probably won't work. But keeping the status quo won't either. What about the idea of creating extra features -- videos, podcasts, behind-the-looks at how a story was reported -- offered to readers who are willing to pay? Sure, you run the risk of creating a tiered system of delivering news. But it might be worth a try.

A Day Without a Journalist

From the makers of "A Day Without a Gay" and the original "A Day Without a Mexican," now comes a thriller about a news cycle that has....NO NEWS. Da da da. "A Day Without a Journalist." Why not?

We'll show 'em. No reporting. No editing. No headlines. No crawl text. Would a full 24 hours without journalism make any statement at all? It certainly would make it so that:

* Bloggers (Yes, I realize the irony here) and local news stations would have to scrounge for their own material

* The breakfast table would have more awkward conversations

* People would have far less to read/talk about at work

* People would be far more productive at work

* Stranded airport passengers would all be talking on their cell phones at once

In all seriousness, though, we're so used to constant news feeds that a daylong drought would be quite noticeable. If you think about it, one news cycle carries a substantial amount of information. Falling behind a day is enough to make a person feel out of touch. If Joni Mitchell's right and readers don't know what they've got 'til it's gone, maybe this is actually worth a try?

(illustration courtesy of Centennial Society)

Washington Weak

The District of Columbia is used to a cyclical game of who's your neighbor. It's the nature of a city filled with people who move in and head out with the political tide. But, as a thoughtful article in the American Journalism Review notes, there's one group who seems to be leaving for good -- local newspaper Washington correspondents.

Jennifer Dorroh mentions in the piece a growing list of publications that are choosing to scale back or cut entirely the D.C. bureau. As detailed in the story, a diminished Washington presence means that newspapers will be less able to hold public officials accountable and less likely to find the next big scandal, let alone chronicle day-to-day activity on The Hill.

Wire services can cover the big national stories, but there's no replacement for reporters who know what readers in a given region want to see covered. You can blog about Washington all you want, but face-to-face access is still the name of the game.

The Death of P-I?

As both a journalist and (former) Seattlite, it's always been a source of pride that my home town falls in the same category as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles when it comes to newspapers. That is, there are multiple metro dailies.

Until now, perhaps. It's dissapointing -- but hardly surprising -- to hear that the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is up for sale with likely 60 days to live. The P-I's parent company, The Hearst Corp., has reported that the newspaper lost about $14 million in 2008.

For years rumors have persisted that either the P-I or the Times, which share a JOA, wouldn't survive. In such a tumultuous newspaper environment, it's impressive that both papers have lasted this long. There was a time when nearly any big city could support two newspapers -- if not more. But that time has passed, and Seattle is hardly in the same population league as the cities mentioned earlier.

We were always a Times family growing up, and perhaps for no other reason than tradition I kept up on Seattle news with that newspaper's Web site. But I always appreciated the P-I for its reporting, as well as for its iconic spinning globe and, well, funny name.

A quick tangent: It's always a bit odd to see a newspaper report about itself, especially when it's A-1 material. Can you imagine being a staff writer assigned to write your own career obituary?

But back to the big picture. Readers generally have won when there's local newspaper competition. That appears to be gone. Still, the Times won't be the only game in town. The P-I has floated the idea of going Web-only with a small staff. The online publication Crosscut has been a welcome addition, and there certainly is room for more innovative competitors.

Still, make no mistake, journalism in Seattle has taken a big hit.