No Responses to “A newspaper’s soul”

1. Lou Covey
   January 16th, 2008 @ 2:37 pm

   I really want to agree. But I’m having a real hard time coming in line here.

   I think, in the least, we should consider the possibility that Murdoch might know what he’s talking about. He’s been very successful in media because he provides communication that the masses actually want.

   Media changes with the masses. Thousands of years ago, someone in Babylonia figured out how to keep records with a written language. That got tranlated into telling stories. And I’m sure there was some grandfather complaining that “if the oral tradition was good enough for my father it should be good enough for my grandchildren,” and ” You got 300 clay tablets and nothing decent to read.”

   We have a generation that receives audio and visual information in 10 to 15 minutes bits between commercials. Another generation zips through that same media to skip commercials or flip through channels gathering various bits of information while surfing on laptops and text messaging friends. Are either of those generations the type to read The Leder in the WSJ?

   Yes it’s important. Yes, it is substantial. But if no one reads it; if it’s only benefit is the possibility of winning a Pulitzer, is it then communication?

   I love the journal and read that column every time I pick it up. But none of my friends do, and neither do my children. Other than you Brian, I can’t really think of anyone who does.

   That’s the truth of the matter. And May Rupert is right.

2. Jake
   January 16th, 2008 @ 5:16 pm

   More here:

   http://acropolisreview.com/2008/01/rupert-murdoch-media-vs-journalism.html

3. Loring Wirbel
   January 16th, 2008 @ 6:46 pm

   My counterpoint to Lou’s valid argument is that USA Today, the epitome of the publication dedicated to the short-sharp-shock story, moved in the late 1990s to long stories stretching up to 2/3 of a page or even a page and a half at times. The long ones still are some of USA Today’s most effective pieces. If it’s good enough for America’s bubble-gum paper, it should be good enough for the elite. And who reads WSJ? The same folks who read Harper’s, Atlantic, NY Review of Books, and The Economist. The snobs. The literate elite. And when everyone else goes to 15-second YouTube clips, there will still be a market for writing to the reading minority.

4. Greeley's Ghost
   January 16th, 2008 @ 10:28 pm

   I’ll never vehemently disagree with Lou (well, maybe not never!), but here’s my question: when you need to make informed decisions about your business and do research beforehand, is it long form or short form?
   Where do you get your information?

5. Lou Covey
   January 17th, 2008 @ 12:44 pm

   I had a long conversation with Drew Lanza (that I recorded and am still working on editing) and he echoed the same concern, but he called in synthesizing information, Drew looked at longer articles to give him the idea.

   But what I’m finding in working with the Facebook/myspace generation is that they don’t trust single sources as much as they dislke long reports. They prefer to get information from multiple sources and create their own synthesis.

   Now that is a nightmare for marketing folks: thousands of consumers that aren’t easily swayed my mass media, but that’s where it is. My son is voting in his first partisan election this year and he registered independent. Why? Because he found out that he would be able to vote for a primary candidate in multiple parties. He is reading (on blogs) and listening (on podcasts) to all the candidates he has access to ( the Rebumblicans don’t allow independents a voice in California) and making his decision (synthesizing the information) on his own.

   Like Loring said, there is a literary elite still reading Harpers, WSJ, The Economist, but they won’t be leading the world in 10 or 20 years.

   It may be scary, but that’s the way things are going.

6. Drew Lanza
   January 18th, 2008 @ 11:57 am

   I have a different (but relevant) take on all of this.

   The total amount of information produced by mankind continues to grow exponentially.

   When we were in grade school, it doubled about every decade or so. I think that curve has grown more steep. With the help of the Internet, it now doubles every five years or so.

   Some will see this as a result of the growth in the Web. I think they have gotten their causality backwards. I think we built the Web to cope with this exponential growth.

   You guys know that I always like to look back to the Industrial Revolution to understand what’s going on in the modern Information Revolution. The trains of the nineteenth century amplified our muscles in the same way that the computers of the twentieth century amplified our brains. But they both came about because of our need to amplify these traits and not the other way ’round. Remember the Erie Canal?

   So, what’s a Renaissance Man like me gonna’ do if he keeps getting bombarded by an exponentially increasing torrent of information?

   I’m going to skim over the top of it. I’ve got no choice but to be a mile wide and an inch deep. We drive cars, but we don’t know what’s under the hood and how it works. We use computers and the web, but we have no idea how all of that is held together.

   We live in an era of headlines and soundbites because it’s all we have time for. And god help us when the people putting those headlines and soundbites out there care more about their value as propaganda than they do as enlightening information.

   Drew

7. Anonymous
   July 31st, 2008 @ 1:24 am

   专业的翻译公司，译佰深圳翻译公司，广州翻译公司，上海翻译公司,东莞翻译公司国内同声翻译（同声传译）领域领头军！同声传译(同传)是国际会议通常使用的翻译方式， 翻译人员进入隔音间里，通过耳机接听发言人的声音再将其翻译给听众。这种形式的翻译方式需要较为复杂的设备以及非常专业的翻译人员，但能节省大量的时间。优质翻译公司译佰翻译公司能提供同传深圳英语翻译 ，深圳日语翻译，深圳法语翻译，深圳德语翻译，深圳俄语翻译，深圳韩语翻译等数种同传语言，培养一批商务口译人员，多年以来，译佰同声翻译在同声传译(同传)领域积累了丰富的业务经验，能提供从专业同声翻译、译员培训到同传设备安装租售业务等一整套国际会议同传服务深圳翻译。

Leave a Reply