3 ms·
DNAinfo was never profitable in its 8 year existence. With the union taking root it was probably never going to see a return. In my opinion the only unethical t
by look_lookatme 9y ago
DNAinfo was never profitable in its 8 year existence. With the union taking root it was probably never going to see a return.
In my opinion the only unethical thing here was taking down the archives. Total severance seemed fine.
- berberous 9y agoWhat about Gothamist? I would bet it was profitable since it was run independently for a long time. It was a glorified blog — lots of reprinting Post articles rather than the independent reporting that DNA Info did, so I imagine it had much lower costs.
- rexf 9y agoThis tweet by someone who appears to have written for Gothamist claims that "Gothamist actually WAS profitable. DNAInfo wasn't." https://twitter.com/lindsayism/status/926201373858856962 https://twitter.com/lindsayism/status/926201373858856962
- katedye 9y agoThey could have sold to a company that would have overhauled their monetization, but you're right that it isn't _unethical_ to shut-down (unnecessary, maybe).
- locopati 9y agoIt's unethical when they pulled the plug _because_ of unionization and, in spite, removed the archives (so any writer who wants to point to their work no longer can). There were ethical ways to handle this - look for buyers, revamp the business model, try a subscription rate, lots of things.
- notyourday 9y agoOpex loses is liability. Company with no opex is an asset.