Not what it seems
There was a roundtable discussion this morning here in Manhattan that was, on its face, about the relationships between and among bloggers and journalism. Several BigMedia moguls were there — and it's easy to tell why and how they got to where they are. They were curious, charming, thoughtful, and well-spoken.
Yet they seemed stuck — particularly the print journalists.
These are not slow, out-of-it captains of industry. They'd probably like to figure out a way to run truly online businesses that are successful. (Although they have a way of saying that they want to “use” or “leverage” bloggers that can make you feel a little nervous.) But it's extraordinarily difficult for them to hire top techies and find ways to get new products, new ways of delivering knowledge, out the door.
The TV guys are much more comfortable with the future. They have global networks that will be very hard to replicate, seemingly indestructible brands, and the visceral human attraction of moving faces and objects to keep them in business.
The print guys are very proud of their priesthood, and the culture of journalism is just about the strongest professional bond I've ever seen. The emotional energy that filled the room when the print guys started decrying the “potentially deadly” inaccuracy of bloggers was remarkable. We Are The Truth, they seemed to think — We Have Standards. Those bloggers, they're just typing. We do so much more.
That's the part — the pride — that made me worry about beloved print journalism. It seemed like a hallmark of descent. We were the best, we were the truest, and even though the blood is running thin and our chins are weaker and our shoulders are rounder, we come from the finest stock. (Speaking of stock: not a diverse group.) I'm familiar with this kind of thinking — I myself am a lawyer and a WASP, two groups that have priesthoods and enormous pride. And are no longer what they used to be.
Everything is changing, the bloggers told the journalists. Play to your strengths in this new world. Give us authentic voices, associative trails, membranes of stories, predictions of impact on the world, visualizations — do all of that, and you'll survive.
But BigMedia, and particularly the print parts of it, are acknowledging that they are slow to change and stuck with enormous staffs and built-in distributor relationships (not to mention staggering newsprint costs). I felt great sympathy for them, even as I struggled to understand their view of the world.
Of course, neither the bloggers nor the journalists will win in the end. The computer will soon cease to be a technician and come into its own as an artist, showing us patterns of meaning based on all of our contributions. It's evolving faster than we are. BigMedia needs to get into the business of writing algorithms rather than news stories.
That's a big change. Under its surface, this well-dressed roundtable discussion (complete with waiters) was really about a future that none of us can hope to control.
Comments
5 Responses to “Not what it seems”
Got something to say?
This doesn't really relate to this particular blog entry, but I thought you might dig on this presentation by the CEO of sxip (assuming you haven't already seen it).
Hi, Jon — Yes, I've seen it, and I tried to persuade Dick to come to State of Play. But he's already committed elsewhere. It's a fine presentation.
I had a chance recently to step back into MSM for a week or so after Katrina. It was as if nothing had changed, attitude-wise, since I left MSM in
“The TV guys are much more comfortable with the future. They have global networks that will be very hard to replicate, seemingly indestructible brands, and the visceral human attraction of moving faces and objects to keep them in business. ”
Actually, tv guys need to perk up, and pay attention. Onion Site, is just one example of a tv show just waiting to happen. Envision, if you will, the day comes, when computers can download tv shows, as easily as they now download emails. The cost of the computer is cheap, cheap, like today's cheap. Now, imagine the web site above, no longer restricted to web site stuff, but capable of providing regular, updated tv shows, radio shows, for a worldwide audience. The talent is out there, the technology is here. All we need is the ability to hook everyone up to the internet, and tv and radio as we know it, disappears.
Knowing this, the tv guys need to understand something else. Nonprofit organizations, such as Public Television, are where folks will migrate, not commercial broadcasters. But, then, I'm biased.
[…] afternoon I certainly felt the presence of the journalistic priesthood, but in this context the bond seemed justifiable. This kind of sustained investigative work […]