There’s an article on nytimes.com about how the model of online news is leading to extinction of news in general. Oh the irony. The article goes on to tick off the inventive (read: rehashed) ways media groups are looking to make money.
Charging for online content subscriptions while using a specific search engine for all news, thus cutting our modes and methods of news theft.
Riight.
Charge money for something in a recession when people are the least likely to be spending money on “extras.” Hmmm. Well then, if you work in a newsroom, the worst is yet to come. It will be straw that breaks the camel’s back for most newsrooms, the ones that haven’t already been shuttered.
The one thing that is POSITIVE in online news is the readership! More people are informed than ever before. We have a connected and thoughtful society and a large part of that is due to online news communication. So why stick it to your readers? It’s not their fault executives had not the foresight nor the instinct to anticipate the news model of the now present.
I’m not saying that journalists shouldn’t be on a payroll. I think online news should have been costing money all along. The fact is most don’t and probably won’t ever cost money online – successfully. If they do, they will likely exist in a vacuum. The ones that charge without a niche market are going to fail and our unemployment will continue to drive upwards and on and on.
1) There will always be a way around it because the Internet cannot be governed to that extent.
Charging for content now is like building a wall around an organism that is constantly evolving and growing with strength and speed. They’ll never keep up.
2) Writers are ego-maniacs.
What, am I telling you something you didn’t already suspect or know about first-hand? People who love to write will do just this no matter what, especially to get people’s attention about how awesome they are at it. If this were just a tug of war between bank tellers, I somehow doubt they’d be on a corner, breaking your twenties illegally because most bank tellers don’t think they were born to do it.
Let’s expound further…
Think about your coveted job in journalism. Now take into account the utter impossibility of getting paid to do. Swivel your chair directly towards your friendly computer and just like that, you’re hired! Argue with me that these people won’t make money and I’ll tell you that Google Adsense and other advertisers will make a liar of you. Tell me that these bloggers or amateur writers lack the talent or know-how, and I’ll tell you how I was hired to report based on the fact I used to be a waitress and could ask people questions. I was very gifted at refilling sodas without being asked to do so, as well as filling used ketchup bottles.
Here’s my stupid opinion no one wants: Use a nonprofit model.
Receive funding from individuals, grants, companies, colleges, foundations, anywherewhositwhatsit. These places and people will give to your news nonprofit because it benefits them through taxes, cred, rep and connections, which most everyone can be interested in. Take the model of a community food co-op. After a certain amount of a member’s investment (time/money), they can get a piece of the pie and have a voice in the organization. That’s what journalism should do at its best, give people a say.
By breaking the chain from advertisers and corporate influences, journalists can be free to do their jobs and maybe actually foster a case that’s worth following for once. Then maybe people would begin to consider paying to read your darn stories.