On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Karen Rustad <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:karen.rustad@gmail.com">karen.rustad@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">Stephen Paul Weber wrote:<br>
><br>
> I think his assumptions are flawed. He assumes that traditional media<br>
> is higher quality journalism than good blogging, that it must be more<br>
> expensive than good blogging, and that people would want to read it over<br>
> good blogging.<br>
><br>
><br>
</div>The thing about the newspaper versus blog debates that has never ceased<br>
to befuddle me: Newspaper proponents argue that papers support<br>
international correspondents, in-depth investigation, and a high level<br>
of fact-checking which (most) blogs do not have the resources to<br>
support. Yet, in hard times, what always gets the axe? International<br>
correspondents, in-depth investigation projects, quality control--all<br>
the things that are supposed to make newspapers unique! I actually had<br>
the chance to ask the head editor of the NYT this and all he could say<br>
was, "I should have you ask my boss that..."<br>
<br>
If they're gonna get rid of everything that makes newspapers worth<br>
reading...why read them?<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
-- Karen</font></blockquote><div><br>I attended a lecture by the managing editor of the New York Times
yesterday, Jill Abramson, and she would seem to agree with your
viewpoint, Karen. She was very afraid for the other papers who are
slashing staff now, and the impression she sought to give, at least,
was that the NYT was not engaging in the same practices. She likened
it to the bleak 1970s in New York, when the NYT actually expanded their
paper, so as to be better prepared for when the pendulum swings back in
their favor.<br>
<br>
She did stress how expensive the things you mentioned are. You'd have
to be very forward looking (and it seems, thankfully, that the NYT is)
to continue to engage in very expensive practices because they're the practices that, for now at least, seem to be lacking in your primary competition.<br>
<br>
Parker<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">_______________________________________________<br>
Discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Discuss@freeculture.org">Discuss@freeculture.org</a><br>
<a href="http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>