8 ms·

This sets up a horrifying set of perverse incentives for journalists. This is not to say that the set of incentives facing journalism today isn't already pretty

by cirgue 8y ago

This sets up a horrifying set of perverse incentives for journalists. This is not to say that the set of incentives facing journalism today isn't already pretty bad, but this forces entities like the NYT further onto a path of convergent evolution with the National Enquirer.

krastanov 8y ago
The journalists I know describe something they call a "firewall". Supposedly the business staff and the journalists simply do not communicate except for very formalized channels. At some places they are not permitted to walk in on each other's floors/buildings. From personal observations, it seems they usually adhere to the firewall.
- 52-6F-62 8y ago
  I’ve worked closely with media, and this is something I’ve witnessed as well. Where many people like to propose that journalists and editors are steered by the business and sales staff-my own experience couldn’t be further from the truth. I can’t speak for less reputable outlets. The journalistic outlets I’ve worked with have been very dedicated to their own voice—and passionately so.
  - kortilla 8y ago
    This works for obvious direct pressure, but there is still pressure in that they work for the same entity. A nytimes journalist wants the paper to do well and as long as that journalist knows how the paper makes money, there will be pressure mentally to support that.
    - 52-6F-62 8y ago
      In my experience, most writers are much more detached from the business than that. They admire working for a publication because of its journalistic reputation, are sometimes unionized [not always], and often stand opposed to business imposing its own desires ranging from editorial changes to working conditions. So I know it's only anecdotal, but my experience leads me to believe your presumptions are largely unfounded. Many journalists have about as much attachment to their publications as a GM factory line worker has to GM stock prices. The pride is in the quality of output. They never expect to become rich off of that work. For journalists, the money comes in publishing best-selling books—not selling 5% more subscriptions one year, or 10x ad-impressions.
frosted-flakes 8y ago
This was covered in the article: > Journalists and other news purists may also wonder whether the Times newsroom is now being tasked with producing lots of emotional stories. > Neither is the case, Allison Murphy, senior vice president of advertising innovation, told me in an interview. The newsroom turned out plenty of emotionally charged stories, anyhow. So it has done nothing different.
mrmanner 8y ago
The same incentives have been there for a hundred years in print journalism, when ads where placed manually, and they didn’t succumb then. The long term loss of readers is worse than the short term ad gains.

by cirgue 8y ago

krastanov 8y ago

The journalists I know describe something they call a "firewall". Supposedly the business staff and the journalists simply do not communicate except for very formalized channels. At some places they are not permitted to walk in on each other's floors/buildings. From personal observations, it seems they usually adhere to the firewall.

52-6F-62 8y ago
I’ve worked closely with media, and this is something I’ve witnessed as well. Where many people like to propose that journalists and editors are steered by the business and sales staff-my own experience couldn’t be further from the truth. I can’t speak for less reputable outlets. The journalistic outlets I’ve worked with have been very dedicated to their own voice—and passionately so.
- kortilla 8y ago
  This works for obvious direct pressure, but there is still pressure in that they work for the same entity. A nytimes journalist wants the paper to do well and as long as that journalist knows how the paper makes money, there will be pressure mentally to support that.
  - 52-6F-62 8y ago
    In my experience, most writers are much more detached from the business than that. They admire working for a publication because of its journalistic reputation, are sometimes unionized [not always], and often stand opposed to business imposing its own desires ranging from editorial changes to working conditions. So I know it's only anecdotal, but my experience leads me to believe your presumptions are largely unfounded. Many journalists have about as much attachment to their publications as a GM factory line worker has to GM stock prices. The pride is in the quality of output. They never expect to become rich off of that work. For journalists, the money comes in publishing best-selling books—not selling 5% more subscriptions one year, or 10x ad-impressions.

frosted-flakes 8y ago

This was covered in the article: > Journalists and other news purists may also wonder whether the Times newsroom is now being tasked with producing lots of emotional stories. > Neither is the case, Allison Murphy, senior vice president of advertising innovation, told me in an interview. The newsroom turned out plenty of emotionally charged stories, anyhow. So it has done nothing different.

mrmanner 8y ago

The same incentives have been there for a hundred years in print journalism, when ads where placed manually, and they didn’t succumb then. The long term loss of readers is worse than the short term ad gains.