Sunday, April 20, 2008

The future of MSM

Today's Star features an intriguing article that examines how MSM is starting to wake up to the fact that many people are turning towards the internet as their #1 source for news - Papers boosting their online "brand".

The Star itself is focussing more attention on ad revenue generated from interest-specific sites, which is also an area that has attracted many bloggers.

As for the print version, I think it will continue although subscriptions will probably decline over time as downloads to personal portable devices rise in popularity.

Another area that will likely grow is the option of a subscription to an ad-free internet zone, embellished with extra features not available on the free site. This is where I think the Globe is behind the times with most of their stories under subscriber lock. It discourages Bloggers from linking to their articles, which decreases traffic to their ad-revenue generated sites. If they were more media-savvy, they'd have both.

Can bloggers and MSM co-exist? Undoubtedly most political blogs are dependent on MSM, and I'll be the first to admit it.

However, I do see a symbiotic relationship emerging as bloggers drive traffic to MSM internet sites and further discussion surrounding their editorials and news items. Some folks may even be encouraged to pick up the print version due to a Blogger's urging.

Yesterday, I was told by a well-known MSM reporter that he has a "problem with bloggers because they are not trained reporters, and frequently spread misinformation due to their reliance on speculation and assumptions driven by their personal, dogmatic agendas..."

Well with all due respect, I don't think bloggers have a monopoly on that one, sir.


Gabby in QC said...

""problem with bloggers because they are not trained reporters, and frequently spread misinformation due to their reliance on speculation and assumptions driven by their personal, dogmatic agendas..."

Well with all due respect, I don't think bloggers have a monopoly on that one, sir."

I hope you included that last sentence in your reply to the journalist. ZING!

I once had an exchange with a columnist where I provided a link to a well-researched blog owned by a lawyer discussing the topic at hand.
The columnist replied that he didn't visit blogs because he wanted to maintain his objectivity. And this guy is one of the most partisan So & Sos ...

Alberta Girl said...

"frequently spread misinformation due to their reliance on speculation and assumptions driven by their personal, dogmatic agendas..."

You just have to laugh at the hypocrasy of that statement.

Maybe they feel a bit threatened?

Swift said...

I quite agree with his opinion in regards to certain bloggers. On the other hand blogs such as Angry in the Great White North, Caledonia Wakeup Call, Climate Audit, and The Black Rod consistently show that formal journalistic training is not a requirement for high quality, original, well researched posts. And the MSM continually provides examples of how formal training is no guarantee of good journalism.

West Coast Teddi said...

I recently wrote a letter to the publisher/editor of the Victoria Times Colonist expressing my concerns with the paper (distribution, editorial slant and the "quick read"). I received a very quick reply with a detailed explanation regarding my concerns (not a form letter). It is obvious that the publisher is most concerned about losing subscribers and thus advertising revenues, both specific and to the internet. The MSM must move to creative solutions to survive and it may just be that they are waking up to a few realities. We the People are passing them by and I have put my money on the line for them to work for.

Brian said...

" ... speculation and assumptions driven by their personal, dogmatic agendas..."

My ... my , that comment actually quite accurately describes most journalists currently employed by the MSM.

To write factual , accurate and logical journalism requires the use of that which resides between one's ears , and some common sense , but unfortunately many in the MSM seem to be sorely lacking in those departments.

Anonymous said...

"she stood firmly by her position that media have a responsibility to put their writings through a "human rights filter" before publication, and said the commission is keen to call out those who do not, jurisdiction be damned."

Comment from Barbara Hall, head of the OHRC.

Then this comment needs to be on the front page of every print media in the country, not just in the blogosphere.

For all their pompous bombast, the MSM has done a poor job of defending the looming crises today with regards to their abilities to publish anything without "filtering" their opinions and news stories through the local HRC's.

It is past time for our political masters, you know the ones supposed to make laws for us, to get involved on the issue of free speech. Because if they don't, who knows, maybe our commisars at the HRC's will make it difficult for them to do so, because the HRC's will have stolen "democracy" out from under them.

Anonymous said...

The star once again misses the point. People turn to the Internet because they have found the MSM to be inaccurate and biased. They are in search of the unbiased truth. If the MSM wants their readership back they will have to drop their current crusading diatribes and go back to reporting the news in a dispassionate and unbiased way.

Anonymous said...

I do not care ONE BIT why newspapers are losing business. I am merely delighted that they are and eager to find ways to increase this trend.

The more journalists coming out of college and not finding work and the more journalists losing their jobs the better.

Screw you MSM. You turned a valuable social resource into an insufferably elitist, politically correct, manipulative, arrogant subculture that served only itself and those who shared that same segment of society.

Möbius said...

I still read 2 or 3 newspapers a day. I avoid the Post now, since they cannot manage to deliver a real live paper-based paper to my door anymore. They did offer me a free online subscription, which is handy when I'm reading the paper at my local restaurant. I suggested they jam it in a certain place, but haven't heard back from them.

The TS, I buy on Sunday only, with great vexation.

paulsstuff said...

A little off topic but:

"Tories on defensive over Elections Canada raid
Updated Sun. Apr. 20 2008 8:30 PM ET News Staff

Conservatives held secret meetings with select reporters Sunday to reveal details about why Elections Canada officers raided their Ottawa headquarters -- and to give their side of the story before court documents are released this week."

Now I may be wrong, but reading the article, methinks it should read Tories on offensive. No?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Yeah, I saw that too, Paul. Nothing like editorializing the news, eh?

From what I hear there was nothing we don't already know in the warrant, which makes the Elections Canada actions all the more suspect.

Perhaps it will be clarified tomorrow.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Updated stories are out now. (Star)

maryT said...

It appears that Mike Duffy and a few other reporters, (no cbc) were given briefings of what will be released from the raid tomorrow. Poor Keith Boag, when asked why he was not allowed in he said, I have no idea. He then went on to say this will give the conservatives time to shape the story, (of course proving they have something to hide) said KB, with a smirk on his face. Will have to watch the ctv news at ll.00p.m. to get their take. Hundreds of pages are involved, and reporters waiting outside the hotel room were out of luck. The guys got out via the fire escape. Hope all the blogs get this covered before the print media does.

maryT said...

Guess I should have read the latest comments before posting. The story is already out there, but I think the cbc will make it bad for the conservatives.