4 ms·
I agree with Ebert's points, but I would put it differently: People who persist in reading newspapers are being trained not to think. There are fewer and fewer
by mechanical_fish 18y ago
I agree with Ebert's points, but I would put it differently: People who persist in reading newspapers are being trained not to think. There are fewer and fewer such people, because newspapers have long since abandoned the thinking person's market.
Fortunately, this isn't the early 1990s anymore. If I want to read (e.g.) Roger Ebert I don't need to force my local paper to carry him.
- zitterbewegung 18y agoWhat is supposed to replace newspapers?
- vaksel 18y agoTwitter! </Arrington>
- mynameishere 18y agoWebsites, of course. The real question is "What is supposed to replace advertising" because web advertising doesn't work very well. My guess: Rich non-media people like George Soros will bankroll news organizations. This already happens with some small political magazines.
- jfarmer 18y agoIsn't that how it worked before the modern advertising industry?
- Alex3917 18y agoNo, before the modern advertising industry it was very cheap to start a newspaper so they were mostly owned by small businesses. The advertising model made it more expensive to run a newspaper which is why the news industry got taken over by wealthy families and then later corporations.
- ashu 18y agoWow, that is very surprising. Any links to read about this?
- Alex3917 18y agoManufacturing Consent (the book), specifically the section in the beginning about the ownership filter. If you do "Look inside this book" and then "excerpt," it explains it in the first few pages of the book. http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227877138&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Econom...
- jfarmer 18y agoInteresting. References? I want to read more.
- rsheridan6 18y agoOr maybe someone will come up with a way to target advertising to consumers in a way that doesn't suck, so you can make a living from a website with reasonable traffic. Adwords doesn't meet this criterion. http://notesfromearth.com/2008/11/27/worst-google-ad-ever/ http://notesfromearth.com/2008/11/27/worst-google-ad-ever/
- fallentimes 18y agoKeep in mind though, gossip sites like perezhilton make close to $1,000,000 per month.
- mynameishere 18y agoKeep in mind that pornography is a 97 billion dollar international business. [1]. A dollar is a dollar is a dollar, yes? And yet, one reader of Commentary magazine is worth a million listeners of Howard Stern. [1] http://www.editmymovies.com/pornography_statistics.html http://www.editmymovies.com/pornography_statistics.html
- fallentimes 18y agoI could spend an hour on that stat page. I think the same type of people that only read newspapers won't migrate to anything better on the internet.
- Alex3917 18y agoPeople still have a lot of respect for newspapers. For example, why are we allowed to talk about conspiracy theories on Hacker News when Roger Ebert writes about them in the paper, but not when they're on someone's blog?
- wensing 18y agobecause newspapers have long since abandoned the thinking person's market. Are you referring to even the WSJ and The New York Times and the Financial Times? Or are you just thinking of the USA Today and local paper varieties?
- maurycy 18y agoI think he refers to The Economist.