3 ms·

And after a while now trying to read non-Blogs, I believe he was right. There is a market for a Netflix for News.

by jsemrau 6y ago

jcassee 6y ago
There is Blendle, but I'm not sure it's doing very well ... https://launch.blendle.com https://launch.blendle.com
- als0 6y ago
  Blendle does a lot of things really well. It'll be a real shame if it doesn't survive due to the market conditions.
simonh 6y ago
There's a need for it, but possibly not a market for it. I think it's the same problem he identified for TV. Everybody knows what we have is broken, but there's no go to market strategy so what we have is a messy marginal market for set top boxes none of which can get solid traction. Similarly for high value news publishing there's no clear go to market strategy for a consolidated service like that, so what we have is a a messy market for news publishers. But then maybe that's actually for the best. A single unified consolidated news publishing platform could have awful consequences for diversity of representation.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  Perhaps it should be centrally funded but each individual gets to choose where to spend it. You get a voucher and it's up to you whether you spend it at Breitbart or the NY Times.
  - anthonybennis 6y ago
    Democracy needs a free press, and not just free but one that is motivated by high quality fact based news. The high quality part is subjective but maybe achievable via a peer review group like a Journalist Guild type awards system. Publications would be required to need to maintain a certain standard of conduct to access the funds awarded by guild. Free of advertising to avoid click bait "news". Perhaps such a model could co-exist with a commercial element. Access to premium services, to keep my proposal vague and aspirational.
    - simonh 6y ago
      Any kind of guild or central body like that would be a political target and pressure group football.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - dangus 6y ago
    This is how Apple News+ works. There’s no voucher, it’s just a monthly fee, but I have no doubt that which paywalled stories you click on determine where your monthly fee goes.
  - robbiep 6y ago
    Like the BBC or Australia’s ABC? This exists
    - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
      I don't get too choose the BBC, if I give up the TV license then I can't watch ITV or Channel 4. It's also a huge political football. It does lean slightly to the left but it doesn't matter which political party you ask they always complain it's biased against them. The current government has been waging was on the BBC for 10 years now. If they thought they could they would shut it down in an instance. What we really need is something funded centrally but they don't have the option of interfering with.
- specialist 6y ago
  "There's a need for it, but possibly not a market for it." Whenever someone touches on market failures, I'm reminded of how the USA government saved the domestic oil producers from themselves. TLDR: Govt imposed regulation and predictability onto the wildcatters, thereby protecting investors and insuring stable supply for consumers. I don't yet know what future marketplaces for journalism will look like. I do know that markets don't just magically appear. Efficient open markets require laws and regulations, to create and then protect those markets.

And after a while now trying to read non-Blogs, I believe he was right. There is a market for a Netflix for News.

jcassee 6y ago

There is Blendle, but I'm not sure it's doing very well ... https://launch.blendle.com https://launch.blendle.com

als0 6y ago
Blendle does a lot of things really well. It'll be a real shame if it doesn't survive due to the market conditions.

simonh 6y ago

There's a need for it, but possibly not a market for it. I think it's the same problem he identified for TV. Everybody knows what we have is broken, but there's no go to market strategy so what we have is a messy marginal market for set top boxes none of which can get solid traction. Similarly for high value news publishing there's no clear go to market strategy for a consolidated service like that, so what we have is a a messy market for news publishers. But then maybe that's actually for the best. A single unified consolidated news publishing platform could have awful consequences for diversity of representation.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
Perhaps it should be centrally funded but each individual gets to choose where to spend it. You get a voucher and it's up to you whether you spend it at Breitbart or the NY Times.
- anthonybennis 6y ago
  Democracy needs a free press, and not just free but one that is motivated by high quality fact based news. The high quality part is subjective but maybe achievable via a peer review group like a Journalist Guild type awards system. Publications would be required to need to maintain a certain standard of conduct to access the funds awarded by guild. Free of advertising to avoid click bait "news". Perhaps such a model could co-exist with a commercial element. Access to premium services, to keep my proposal vague and aspirational.
  - simonh 6y ago
    Any kind of guild or central body like that would be a political target and pressure group football.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dangus 6y ago
  This is how Apple News+ works. There’s no voucher, it’s just a monthly fee, but I have no doubt that which paywalled stories you click on determine where your monthly fee goes.
- robbiep 6y ago
  Like the BBC or Australia’s ABC? This exists
  - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
    I don't get too choose the BBC, if I give up the TV license then I can't watch ITV or Channel 4. It's also a huge political football. It does lean slightly to the left but it doesn't matter which political party you ask they always complain it's biased against them. The current government has been waging was on the BBC for 10 years now. If they thought they could they would shut it down in an instance. What we really need is something funded centrally but they don't have the option of interfering with.
specialist 6y ago
"There's a need for it, but possibly not a market for it." Whenever someone touches on market failures, I'm reminded of how the USA government saved the domestic oil producers from themselves. TLDR: Govt imposed regulation and predictability onto the wildcatters, thereby protecting investors and insuring stable supply for consumers. I don't yet know what future marketplaces for journalism will look like. I do know that markets don't just magically appear. Efficient open markets require laws and regulations, to create and then protect those markets.