Posts by giovanni tiso
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I didn't mean to suggest that it was the Internet's fault either. Or that the old model couldn't use reforming. It may be however that the Web has accelerated some of the trends that were already in place. As a medium it certainly doesn't run counter a neoliberal approach.
-
I don't think there'll ever be a shortage of actual, factual information.
So you reckon that in the case of Watergate for instance the facts would have just outed themselves, by virtue of being there, without journalists having to be involved?
-
It's rough that it's getting harder to profit from quality. But only for the journalists and newspapers. People wanting news, including quality news, have never had it so good.
If you're after quantity, yes. I look at Italy and I think the quality has gone down a lot. They say the same of the US, where good newspapers are closing down left right and centre. I haven't been in New Zealand for long enough to judge long-term trends, but I find the quality of the reporting and especially of the commentary here to be an embarassment. But that perhaps is just me. The issue however is whether the model that we have is sustainable, and opinions clearly are divided, but the reality speaks of shrinking newsrooms. Will that also affect the quality of the product? Hard to say. But I find it hard to be optimistic.
Why can't we subscribe to the investigative journalist directly?
I'd still rather subscribe to a newsroom, myself. I want somebody who gets to have robust editorial meetings. But for sure one could think of different models.
That flattr link was very interesting.
-
I reckon the future for online journalism is about having fantastic conversation starters and then starting great conversations between interesting people (with money to spend).
Who's doing the investigative reporting while everybody is busy doing the commentary?
-
See, that's just madness. News is not a scarce commodity, but good reporting is, and the problem of how to pay for it is a very real one. Mitchell puts it quite succinctly in his Guardian piece, I thought: journalism plus a lively blogosphere is great; the latter without the former is just a chilling prospect.
-
It's a shame they're not real headlines, but it really is very good.
-
My understanding of the time stats was that if I go and read an essay that is on a single page, and take two hours to do it, then either close the browser tab or exit the page via anything other than a link on the page itself, it counts as a visit with a duration of zero seconds. I may be wrong, but that's how it was explained to me.
-
A head/desk simulator could work.
-
Even if I liked its change in editorial direction, its not online, and so dead to me.
That's kind of depressing. When it was good I was happy to pay for it. Similarly when I'm in Italy I buy La Repubblica, which is an excellent newspaper and is not online. Just demanding that things be online seems a little extreme.
-
I must say, I would regard developing content for a Listener app as a dream gig. .
Clearly the Listener content would be pretty useless for it.