DISQUS

rick waghorn · 2 years ago

I'd like to think that I produce pieces of meaningful journalism - and with 100,000 page views so far for the month of January so far, I've got some half-decent traffic numbers on my side as doing pure journalism - minus the time/distribution constraints of a printing press - works, albeit in the little world that is provincial football reporting.
That said, however, commercially it is a tough nut to crack and whilst I hunker down for a reasonably tight spring, I suspect the answer - for me, at least - will ultimately include at least five income streams which, together, may yet get me there. For somewhere in the midst of banner advertising locally bought and sourced; straight subscriptions for premium content; affiliate advertising; premium text alerts; a soccer betting portal; the ability, in theory, to do discount 'bulk' subscription deals to every office worker sat in Norwich Union just as the Daily Mail might drop papers off in Little Chefs; and, finally/possibly/eventually, servicing electronic sports desks with syndicated match reports, I ought to be able to fund my work-from-home living... as, in theory, ought a mini, 'news' team syndicating their copy back into bigger news hubs. But it ain't easy, trust me.

Martin · 2 years ago

Rick,

I certainly think you are doing meaningful journalism.

In fact, I think journalism students should be studying what you are doing.

Richard Sambrook · 2 years ago

Really good post Martin. News is seen as a commodity - but we need more than Reuters, PA and AP to have people on the ground and that costs money. Facts are sacred etc...;-) Journalism has to be based on newsgathering before we an have comment.

Howard Weaver · 2 years ago

t's impossible to argue with Nichols' conclusion -- that journalism is more important than the medium or the ownership that produces it. But I fear his failure to address the basic reality behind journalism's present troubles leaves his overall argument somewhat barren.

In my view, the problems don’t center on content or ownership. It’s more about the disassociation of revenue from content.

Many newspapers are doing reasonably well in learning to migrate our journalism to new platforms; we need to do so better (and faster), but I have near 100 percent confidence in our ability to extend into a new multiplatform, multichannel world with our values and mission intact.

The key challenge is to figure out what to do about the fact that advertisers no longer need us as much as they once did. Traditionally, our business was to aggregate audiences and then sell them to advertisers. Doing so financed our expensive pursuit of the mission.

But advertisers increasingly can find audiences elsewhere, or even bypass the notion of audiences by plugging directly into consumers, as with company websites, eBay or Monster.

Fortunately, the audience model still works; it just doesn’t work as well as it once did. We have lost the unique advantages (unfair advantages, to be frank) of operating as monopolies with high barriers against competition.

Now we have to learn to behave differently. Financing newspapers or newsrooms with foundation money won’t change that. (If you think monopoly newspapers lost touch with readers, wait till you see what a non-profit newsroom does.)

I see salvation in embracing a capitalist, audience-centered model even more closely. As Marshall Field famously said to a recalcitrant clerk, “Give the lady what she wants.”

Don't protest that that's just a prescription for more celebrity pregnancy news or ever-more graphic hanging videos (though somebody will emerge to provide all that, God knows). If we’re truly responsive to the needs of civic life in this society, we’ll find robust, attentive audiences willing to pay, one oway or another, for what we provide.

As Nichols rightly asserts, honest, fearless journalism is essential for self-government. And because it’s essential, it will be economic. It is for us to discover how to make that connection in new ways, replacing the eroding old ways that no longer suffice.