3 ms·

As someone who has worked as a writer and editor at a newspaper, I think you're undervaluing journalists (it's a high-skill, analytical job) and making a false

by javert 14y ago

As someone who has worked as a writer and editor at a newspaper, I think you're undervaluing journalists (it's a high-skill, analytical job) and making a false distinction between editors and journalists (it's like "software architect" vs. "programmer" - same basic skills, more supervisory role). But that's not what I want to talk about. My actual point is that for better journalism to happen (what you call better editing), it needs to be incentivized. I am still hopeful that somebody will figure out how to build a successful journalism platform, probably based on micropayments, that incentivizes good journalism. I'm not sure if PG listed this in his essay from a while back about great world-changing startup ideas, but I think it would qualify.

DanielBMarkham 14y ago
Apologies for the lack of clarity. I don't feel there is that much of a distinction between editors and journalists. What I'm saying is basically that by allowing instantaneous publishing, the web is allowing journalists to "go to press" in 3 seconds. There doesn't have to be much thought given to rewrites, or sourcing, or flow, or editorial content. In fact, I'd argue that the more time the modern journalist spends doing these things is a disadvantage. Of course the web eventually sorts it all out: it's wrong a bunch but the correct story eventually makes it. But we're losing something. This is very similar to the comments made by old-timey C++ programmers looking at modern OO IDEs. Yes, you can do things really fast, but you're also losing an important part of the craft by doing it this way. In my opinion these two roles, which of course could be performed by the same person, are separating. Long-format, well-edited work is going down a separate path than what we would consider traditional journalism. Beats me where it ends up. I don't think there will be a journalism platform built. This isn't a money problem. This is a structural problem. Technology has pulled apart the instantaneous recording of events from the polished presentation of "news"
aubergene 14y ago
I think about building something like this all the time.
knowtheory 14y ago
There have been a number of efforts to innovate in the news industry, some which have met with some modicum of success, but no eventual impact. YC has even funded a number of startups some of which have folded in spectacular style. As for micropayments & kickstarter there is/was http://spot.us/ http://spot.us/ which was purchased by Minnesota Public Radio and has been neglected a bit.
- javert 14y ago
  I checked that site, couldn't figure out its actual model in 30 seconds (or even where to go to figure it out), and I think that's a big problem. But it looks like they were going in what I think is a good direction.

by javert 14y ago

DanielBMarkham 14y ago

Apologies for the lack of clarity. I don't feel there is that much of a distinction between editors and journalists. What I'm saying is basically that by allowing instantaneous publishing, the web is allowing journalists to "go to press" in 3 seconds. There doesn't have to be much thought given to rewrites, or sourcing, or flow, or editorial content. In fact, I'd argue that the more time the modern journalist spends doing these things is a disadvantage. Of course the web eventually sorts it all out: it's wrong a bunch but the correct story eventually makes it. But we're losing something. This is very similar to the comments made by old-timey C++ programmers looking at modern OO IDEs. Yes, you can do things really fast, but you're also losing an important part of the craft by doing it this way. In my opinion these two roles, which of course could be performed by the same person, are separating. Long-format, well-edited work is going down a separate path than what we would consider traditional journalism. Beats me where it ends up. I don't think there will be a journalism platform built. This isn't a money problem. This is a structural problem. Technology has pulled apart the instantaneous recording of events from the polished presentation of "news"

aubergene 14y ago

I think about building something like this all the time.

knowtheory 14y ago

There have been a number of efforts to innovate in the news industry, some which have met with some modicum of success, but no eventual impact. YC has even funded a number of startups some of which have folded in spectacular style. As for micropayments & kickstarter there is/was http://spot.us/ http://spot.us/ which was purchased by Minnesota Public Radio and has been neglected a bit.

javert 14y ago
I checked that site, couldn't figure out its actual model in 30 seconds (or even where to go to figure it out), and I think that's a big problem. But it looks like they were going in what I think is a good direction.