Friday, February 27, 2009

The Price We Don't Pay







  1. America mandates stupidity from Head Start to university diversity admissions, advertising, cults of professional management, and safety nets sundering deeds from personal responsibility. Welfare to the undeserving! Literacy and numeracy are crimes against the State.

    All informative media will yield to a daily two minute Central dictum of Official truth. Anybody who protests is guilty of treason (capital crime - medical disassembly for transplants). "Orthodoxy means not thinking - not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." George Orwell, 1984.

  2. Today official truth is made by scoring high on digg. That might not be centralized, but still a dictum. But hey, we're all individuals.

  3. Правда, "The Truth", condensed version. Will you believe what you see or what you are told? Religion, string theory, SUSY, and Wall Street soured the latter (three of four from physcists).

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Hi Bee,

    I think the mode of finance has little to do with it and that that there are as many cons as there are pros in public financing or endowment as there is in the current system. As much as Swenson and Schmidt would like to deny it, journalism does take sides and promotes a viewpoint other then just strictly assimilating and disseminating the facts. With the current system there is a variety of perspectives and I would tend to believe that government funding or endowment would only serve to restrict the range, rather then increase it. For example Canada's own CBC is a painful reminder of this.

    The popularity aspect has been with us since journalism beginnings with Benjamin Franklin first acknowledging that the public must be entertained by in large to become engaged, so he wrote his papers using satire and wit as devises to serve in this realization. As for advertizing he moved it up to the second and third pages, at a time when his contemporaries reserved this space for editorial along with the first page.

    I think it more a case that mainstream journalism has not yet adapted to the new media environment and thus their trouble rests more in this then anything else. Also, in the context of an ever shrinking world there is a lot of redundancies that exists in the system, which can and should be further filtered out. After all that is why organizations like Reuters got their start in the first place. That’s to ask Just how many does it take to properly report on a plane crash or any other disaster or tragedy?

    My take on the whole thing is that it all lays at the feet of the readers themselves, rather then the writers. Take for instance this blog with its average hits of a day of a thousand. Then look at the high quality content it has, the depth it possesses and the relevancy it holds. Yes I find it extremely interesting, along with some others, yet of the larger world we represent only a speck on the wall. No I’m afraid the Ophras with their three ring circuses not only more appeal to the world, yet unfortunately do so by reflecting it rather the shaping it.

    Although I never agreed with Ayn Rand’s philosophy she did write a story called The Fountainhead that rings with as much truth today as it did when it was written more then 60 years. It stressed the importance of the individual over that of the group and contended that newspapers primarily only wrote what people wanted to hear rather then what they needed to. Therefore I don’t see how funding methodology will have any great impact other then perhaps to have much written that is never read. Like they say you can lead horses to water yet you can’t make them drink. I feel that the best we can do is to find ways and means that will have more first recognize their thirst and convinced that begins with a better primary and formal education; otherwise as the other adage laments it's like throwing pearls before swine.



  6. Hi Phil,

    Certainly the question of financing is not the only issue, but I believe it to be central. You are of course right however, that other types of financing than for-profit have their drawbacks as well and thus need more consideration. I think that the solution would lie in a mix of all possibilities, some of which presently might not be realized at all.

    Indeed, journalism takes sides. I don't have a problem with that in general. What I have a problem with is if taking sides comes as alleged neutrality. Journalists carry a responsibility, and from my (limited) experience they are well aware of it. They are just often hindered in living out what they believe would best inform the public because of the need to create profit (please the editor, produce articles that sell well, sensations, scary stories, gossip).

    Either way, the point is the same as what my post was aiming at: there needs to be some way to reward quality, but the only measure which is currently present and used is that of popularity. Best,


  7. Hi Bee,


    On this we certainly agree, as I have often wondered the same as to how this might be accomplished? One thing that has happened with the new media is that people can restrict their attention(s) only to their interests, while ignoring by avoiding everything else. So in the past if you bought a newspaper primarily for the sports section, financials, editorials or world news, more go online to satisfy this. For local news people turn to television and radio. Other efforts to bring politics by way of airing the proceedings of government have largely proved to be a failure; not so much because of lack of interest, yet largely because it has the shallowness and pettiness of those that represent us become even more painfully obvious.

    In in my own observations, no matter which way you slice it; things still come down to the individual and to ask how the general quality can be improved. That includes, like Brian in you Youtube bemoaned, having more thinking for themselves, which is still not enough without being exposed to the thoughts of others of quality (both of the past and the present), so ones considerations may be broadened.

    How then can we in this brave new world encourage people to become more rounded and as importantly always engaged? It may come down to ask how can we have more write down, express and share their thoughts, rather then only limiting themselves to reading others. One thing about this media that has been true since its beginning’s, is that the contributors are far outnumbered by the users, despite it having a two way potential. So I would ask all the lurkers out there, to add to the dialogue so that they are not simply pulled along with the tide, yet rather help to form the forces they are subjected to.



  8. A tax sheltered account in the Cayman Islands, with many millions in it - that is the American dream :) or should we call it nightmare?

  9. Campaign for Democratic Media

    This threatens Canada's free speech and economic competitiveness....Maybe it applies to other countries?

  10. Newspapers are still making money, generally on the order of from 10-20% of revenues is profit, but newspaper holding companies are losing money hand over fist. When newspaper consolidation made sense, chains bought large numbers of papers and held them at a book value based on their purchase price. Unfortunately, people are more pessimistic about the economy these days, and stock prices are lower, so the market value of a newspaper chain is much lower than its book value. When this happens, accountants basically collapse the corporate state. They call it impairment of goodwill or mark to market, and the company suddenly has a huge loss on its books, even though its operations are making money.

    As for the future of journalism, I think it is excellent. A reporter who knows his or her beat and can provide high quality reporting can make a living from subscriptions and advertising. I've been spending more money on online subscriptions, even as I have punted on newspapers, most magazines and cable television. The new media allow me to be more selective, and put my money where my eyeballs are.

    Unfortunately, the existing framework for news reporting is not a good fit with the current energy domain. Think of the internet as moving us along the curve of binding energy. The particles are still there, but the binding situation no longer makes sense.



Comment moderation on this blog is turned on.