Sometimes outsiders have a clearer view

So, a random friend of the Atlantic Monthly's James Fallows, who happens to work at Google, appears to have a clearer view of what ails newspapers than nearly anyone in the newspaper biz. Here's the link to Fallows, quoting his unnamed friend: http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/05/more_on_google_craigslist_and.php

So, what would William Randolph Hearst do in the current environment? As the 'oracle of Google' suggested to Fallows, probably not wringing his hands and moping. Of course, Citizen Hearst had his own issues, but it would be great to see newspapers jumping into the future, rather than longing for the good old days.

A bow to the Voice of San Diego

Making a living during this Great Recession doesn't leave much time for other things, like blogging. But, hey journalism needs lots of help, and I'm doing my small part.

Kudos to the Voice of San Diego, a nonprofit in Southern California that's getting a fair amount of praise in journalistic circles and winning fans in the San Diego community as well. It appears to be doing a fine job of experimenting and covering news that might not get covered by the shrinking, some would say shriveling, San Diego Union-Tribune.

The Union-Trib is under new and seemingly bone-headed management. Here, the Voice reports on U-T management's brilliant plan to drain every ounce of entrepreneurial spirit out of its reporters, editors and other staffers: http://voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/05/22/this_just_in/336confidentiality052209.txt

Ya gotta love it when the bean counters have no idea how to build a brand or inspire a beleaguered workforce, so they threaten people instead. In this case, forcing staffers to promise that if they escape they won't lure other inmates (I mean employees) to join them in new, more appealing workplaces.

18 things to do this summer for j-students/others

From freelancer Mark Coughlin, via Jeff Jarvis' Twitter post, 18 things journalism students, and perhaps some of their elders, should consider doing this summer: http://tinyurl.com/oj682d

I'm doing at least one of them, learning the blogging thang, right now.

About that last post

I certainly didn't and don't want to minimize the harm, angst, sorrow, etc., created by the current media meltdown. Like many in journalism and outside it, I will miss much of what's disappearing, and feel for the suffering of those who have been forced to leave jobs, and careers, they love.

But the creative destruction of capitalism, like that of evolution, is hard to avoid. You've got to adjust, got to evolve, or you're toast.

One thing is perfectly clear

The one clear thing in the chaos over journalism's future and definition: Thanks to the Internet, it's going to have to become much faster, more flexible and more interactive. And pronto.

Anyone who uses Twitter regularly for news and information, as opposed to mindless Twitterpation, can see that evolving on a daily basis. Yes, mistakes and hoaxes get made and passed on. But that's long been true in traditional journalism too. What makes all this new and different is that the gap between 'readers' and 'writers' is vanishing. Readers can comment instantly on what you write, challenging your thinking or your facts. Yes, it can be annoying, or in some cases verge on cyberstalking or character assasination. But it can also be enlightening.

Mistakes can be fixed almost instantly. Ideas can change. Progress can be made in real time, or very close to it.

Old-line journalists, especially editors (I think) are resistant to this new world. They liked the old one, where a few letters to the editor or public service announcements did the trick of interacting with the public. But now the public wants more interaction, and wants to help bake the journalistic cake, either by providing news and info, or by commenting, sometimes pretty caustically, on what others are reporting and writing.

Is that so bad? In blogs and many online forums, of course, much of this is old hat. But it's hitting mainstream journalism, and hard. How the mainstream media respond will determine who lives and who dies.

I'm old enough to be part of the old, and experimental enough to be part of the new. I think it's exciting, despite the 'creative destruction' currently wrecking much of the old journalistic infrastructure. It turns out that a format laid out for journalism in the 19th century needs major tweaking as the first decade of the 21st century heads downhill.

That's not so much of a surprise, is it?

Or maybe Gavin doesn't 'get it'

As a disgruntled S.F. Chronicle news staffer points out, in an email, "It's apparently lost on Newsom" that the Chronicle's reporters also produce content for the SFgate.com web site, and that "People under 30 certainly would notice when those stories disappear along with the paper."

Out of the mouth of Gavin

The Economist, not a slouch in the news biz itself, thinks San Francisco "stands a fair chance of becoming the first major American city without a daily newspaper."

What's more, in a May 14 story about how the Internet is killing newspapers while giving birth to new forms of journalism, the Economist quotes S.F. Mayor Gavin Newsom as saying that if the San Francisco Chronicle were to disappear, "People under 30 won't even notice."

Ouch. Top words, but likely true. The good news, according to the Economist and a host of others, is that new technologies and new experimental forms of journalism are beginning to emerge. More on that later. Here's what the Economist has to say: http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13649304

More interest by tycoons in nonprofit news

This Business Times story piggybacks onto the Newsweek story today about David Geffen's reported interest in buying a stake in the New York Times and possibly converting it to a nonprofit: http://tinyurl.com/ql76yj

Fascinating that billionaires like Geffen and San Francisco's Warren Hellman are so interested in the fate of journalism, even though the business metrics are looking so grim.

Biting the hand of government

David Carr of the New York Times had a great quote in his "The Media Equation" column Monday re the arse-backwards concept of getting the U.S. government to bail out or otherwise subsidize newspapers.

The quote, from David Simon, former Baltimore Sun reporter and creator of "The Wire" TV series, says it all: "High-end journalism can and should bite any hand that tries to feed it. And it should bite a government hand most viciously."

Everyone's got religion now

Suddenly, the wild notion of charging for news content is gaining momentum. The Wall Street Journal's experimenting with micro-payments, and even Dean Singleton of MediaNews has got the new religion. Here's a short online account of a MediaNews memo outlining Singleton's new thinking: http://tinyurl.com/op7tm5

It's not clear exactly what Singleton and MediaNews have in mind, but at least more media folks are rethinking the basics of what's now jokingly called the newspaper business model. It's broken. It's got to be fixed, or replaced -- tinkering ain't going to do the trick.

A possible benefactor

Late last week, I wrote a story for the San Francisco Business Times on an effort by S.F. financier Warren Hellman to help reinvent journalism in the Bay Area, and possibly beyond. He's still in the midst of investigating possible options. Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/pur5y8

Interesting that even an ultra-successful financier has discovered that finding new financially sound paths for journalism is harder than it looks in the Internet era.

What I'm Trying To Do

Journalism is in trouble. Everyone who cares about journalism knows it. So do those who don't care, or who hope to undermine it. Big newspapers are folding, or shrinking. Classifieds have fled to Craigslist and other online sites. Display ads are disappearing too, due to the recession but also because newspapers are clearly no longer cool, and may no longer be a compelling way to reach consumers' pocketbooks. Magazines and traditional broadcast news are also under pressure.

And the people who create the "content" -- reporters, editors, photographers -- are in trouble too. Jobs are disappearing, pay shrinking, options narrowing. But most important of all, their calling is in jeopardy. The career, the profession, the craft they signed up for appears to be falling apart.

This blog is an attempt to find some solutions. Obviously, new ones are needed, especially on the business side of journalism, but on the editorial side as well. Consumers don't grow weary of your product if it's meeting their needs. Technology changes. Expectations change. We, as journalists, need to change too.

So, let's put our heads together and find some, with help from anyone who's willing to pitch in.

What we need now are crowds of innovations and innovators. Flocks of Gutenbergs. Let's give it a go.