A Newspaper Publisher Lies

Just for the record and what it’s worth, in his speech arguing that newspapers are OK - really, they are - Louisville Courier-News publisher Arnold Garson lies about me. He says:

Jeff Jarvis is another consultant who has been very widely quoted about the pending death of newspapers. He has written such articles as “Hitting the coffin nail on the head for newspapers,” and “Why newspapers are . . .” ‚ I can’t say the word in polite company, but it starts with an F. He also is the author of the book, What Would Google Do? a fawning look at a company that has built a business model that is dependent, in part, on content taken from newspapers. But the key thing you need to know about Mr. Jarvis is that he does consulting work for new-media companies that compete directly with newspapers, and, thus has a vested interest in the economic decline of newspapers. The worse we do, the better he does.

In fact, the only companies that have paid me recently to consult or speak are newspaper and magazine companies here, in Germany, and in the U.K. I list all my clients on my disclosures page. I am a partner at Daylife and its largest clients are all mainstream news companies; the better they do, the better Daylife does. I will also work this summer on the New Business Models for News Project at CUNY to try to flesh out more revenue and business models for journalism; that is funded by the Knight, McCormick, and MacArther foundations.

Garson did not bother to research or check his facts and instead chose to libel me just because we disagree and I dare to criticize newspapers’ stewardship of journalism. Who does he think he is - a blogger?

I think Garson is also wrong about Google taking content rather than sending audience to him, but I’ll spare us the lecture on the link economy vs. the content economy.

And I think he’s wrong about newspapers. His first big defense of the state of their business is that they’re better off than car dealers and realtors. That sure as hell ain’t saying much. And, of course, every time a dealer and an agent goes out of business, newspapers lose more business. But nevermind. The sand down here looks just fine. What newspapers need is not a defense but an offense.

Comments

[PastTense:]

This garbage doesn't belong in Seeking Alpha, since the attacks did not occur here.

May 19 01:44 PM

[Jeff Jarvis:]

PastTense: I don't disagree with you. I put it on my personal blog because the guy attacked me personally and I wanted it on the record.

Seeking Alpha has my authorization to pick up any post they want and I usually think they make sensible picks. On this one, I think you're right.

Separately from that, though, the speech is incredible for its head-in-sand protest on behalf of newspapers as they are and were. But that'd be a different post.

- Jeff Jarvis

May 19 03:17 PM

[Roger Knights:]

The article was post-worthy for its sarcastic penultimate line:

"But nevermind. The sand down here looks just fine."

May 19 03:38 PM

[Davis Freeberg:]

I thought "who does he think he is a blogger?" was a pretty good zing too.

May 20 11:14 AM

[Richter Scale:]

Jeff-yeah, you're doom and gloom but you're correct "every time a dealer and an agent goes out of business, newspapers lose more business". Let's not even mention the loss of classifieds. Right now, the only "big client" ads we're seeing are cell-phone companies. After that, it's Amish heaters and gutter cleaning contractors. Sad.

May 20 10:56 PM