FullMetalPhotographer's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/206239/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/161473/comments?source=feed#comment-693458 693458
(1) The need for speed, has down a lot of damage not because how fast the info goes up but how little it is checked. We are now talking information going up in a constant flow information with poor follow through and fact checking. There used to be a technological barriers but those barriers have collapsed. So information is not edited as throughly as it should be and is not fact check. There is also poor follow through on developing stories. Instead we the next hot piece of information is thrown up. Also news organizations do not like to admit to mistakes. So if they make a mistake on the news cycle they are slow to correct it.

(2) Lack of personal, TV and printed Newsrooms have shrunk. Most newsrooms have 1/3 the size of personal that they did in the 80's. You have less editors, and less reporters in the field. Reporters are spread thin on beats so they have a harder time developing reliable sources. There are less editors to look over copy to check facts and even grammar.
I recently saw a Lee Paper in Hanford, CA fire their only Hispanic reporter, who good speak, read and write spanish in community with a 53% hispanic population.

(3) Lack of journalism skills, This goes back a lot to lack of personal. When you cut staff with early retirement, fire experienced reporters in order to have cheaper less experienced reporters, the quality of coverage will go down. If you look at the amount of years of experience it has decline drastically. This isn't rocket science.

To any corporation that owns media they do not understand journalism. They view journalists as nothing but a cost. A corporation views journalism only as a advertising delivery system. So the quality of the journalism is not an economic concern.]]> Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:33:11 -0400
(1) The need for speed, has down a lot of damage not because how fast the info goes up but how little it is checked. We are now talking information going up in a constant flow information with poor follow through and fact checking. There used to be a technological barriers but those barriers have collapsed. So information is not edited as throughly as it should be and is not fact check. There is also poor follow through on developing stories. Instead we the next hot piece of information is thrown up. Also news organizations do not like to admit to mistakes. So if they make a mistake on the news cycle they are slow to correct it.

(2) Lack of personal, TV and printed Newsrooms have shrunk. Most newsrooms have 1/3 the size of personal that they did in the 80's. You have less editors, and less reporters in the field. Reporters are spread thin on beats so they have a harder time developing reliable sources. There are less editors to look over copy to check facts and even grammar.
I recently saw a Lee Paper in Hanford, CA fire their only Hispanic reporter, who good speak, read and write spanish in community with a 53% hispanic population.

(3) Lack of journalism skills, This goes back a lot to lack of personal. When you cut staff with early retirement, fire experienced reporters in order to have cheaper less experienced reporters, the quality of coverage will go down. If you look at the amount of years of experience it has decline drastically. This isn't rocket science.

To any corporation that owns media they do not understand journalism. They view journalists as nothing but a cost. A corporation views journalism only as a advertising delivery system. So the quality of the journalism is not an economic concern.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/159660/comments?source=feed#comment-661102 661102
First you have to create a brand that people care about and want to support then they will buy your logo covered merch.

Simple put newspapers need to make themselves relevant and have some value to their customers then people will connect and buy the logo because they support the brand.]]> Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:41:26 -0400
First you have to create a brand that people care about and want to support then they will buy your logo covered merch.

Simple put newspapers need to make themselves relevant and have some value to their customers then people will connect and buy the logo because they support the brand.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/156002/comments?source=feed#comment-642166 642166 Today the opposite is true. The corporations are draining and cannibalizing the smaller papers in order to survive as a corporate entity at the cost of local and community journalism.
I have watched Lee Enterprises shut down 6 of 8 local papers and publications including a Spanish newspaper in a community in which 53% of the population was Hispanic. 4 communities lost all local coverage of their communities and government.
What appears to be surviving is the smaller independent papers that are not suffering the large debt of the public corporations. They seem to be more nimble an able take greater advantage of things like the web, and to adjust their economic models easier than their corporate counter parts.]]> Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:11:49 -0400 Today the opposite is true. The corporations are draining and cannibalizing the smaller papers in order to survive as a corporate entity at the cost of local and community journalism.
I have watched Lee Enterprises shut down 6 of 8 local papers and publications including a Spanish newspaper in a community in which 53% of the population was Hispanic. 4 communities lost all local coverage of their communities and government.
What appears to be surviving is the smaller independent papers that are not suffering the large debt of the public corporations. They seem to be more nimble an able take greater advantage of things like the web, and to adjust their economic models easier than their corporate counter parts.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/152649/comments?source=feed#comment-612097 612097
At this point trying to protect a paper's circulation by limiting what content is online reminds me a lot of the WWII Japanese soldiers found years after war on a Pacific island, who thought the war was still on.

Newspapers need to realize that they are not in the paper selling business but in the information delivery business. They need to embrace the web and integrate into the paper. If it is done right it should have a synergistic effect and boast the web and paper product.

The only way an online subscription will work is if AP, Reuters, Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, BBC and all the other news sources went subscription. I don't see that happening soon. By putting more video, and interactive media that you can attach commercials and advertisements too will you begin to change the market pyridine and increase value in the web and printed product.]]> Sun, 02 Aug 2009 18:56:33 -0400
At this point trying to protect a paper's circulation by limiting what content is online reminds me a lot of the WWII Japanese soldiers found years after war on a Pacific island, who thought the war was still on.

Newspapers need to realize that they are not in the paper selling business but in the information delivery business. They need to embrace the web and integrate into the paper. If it is done right it should have a synergistic effect and boast the web and paper product.

The only way an online subscription will work is if AP, Reuters, Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, BBC and all the other news sources went subscription. I don't see that happening soon. By putting more video, and interactive media that you can attach commercials and advertisements too will you begin to change the market pyridine and increase value in the web and printed product.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/140891/comments?source=feed#comment-535400 535400 One of the interesting side effects of the web was it showed a dirty little secret in newspaper ads effectiveness. The web ads of newspapers were not that effective on their sites. So the question is how effective are they in the paper. The realization was they are not that effective in print either. ]]> Sun, 07 Jun 2009 04:19:22 -0400 One of the interesting side effects of the web was it showed a dirty little secret in newspaper ads effectiveness. The web ads of newspapers were not that effective on their sites. So the question is how effective are they in the paper. The realization was they are not that effective in print either. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/141366/comments?source=feed#comment-533669 533669 The thing to remember here is the internet was not the source of the newspaper industry problems it just exacerbated it. The issues Newspapers really started when they went from family owned to publicly own.
The major issues hitting papers now is not the internet but the credit crunch. The greatest hope for newspapers is the net. It can also be suicide if they decide to continue fighting it.]]> Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:27:17 -0400 The thing to remember here is the internet was not the source of the newspaper industry problems it just exacerbated it. The issues Newspapers really started when they went from family owned to publicly own.
The major issues hitting papers now is not the internet but the credit crunch. The greatest hope for newspapers is the net. It can also be suicide if they decide to continue fighting it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/141366/comments?source=feed#comment-532782 532782 -(Major Motoko Kusanagi) Ghost In The Shell

Humpty Dumpty not only fell down but was turned into an omelet and was served up.
Newspapers have been living in fantasy since the 90's. Numbers were declining before then. By 2001 Newspaper invested heavily in the internet or I should say the bubble. As far as Google goes the Genie has left the bottle. To be blunt Google and Yahoo are not the issue here. Newspapers retro economic model and news distribution model is the problem. I hate to say it but a pay per story model will not work because there are so many other sources. Even if you put a gag on AP. You still have Reuters, CNN, FOX and many more willing to fill those shoes.
Newspapers need to think differently. They need to realize they are not in the printing business but in the information business. Gather and delivering information. They need to lose the the Deadline mentality and think of a constant flow of information. They need to look at partnerships such as Amazon and Apple for news distribution. If they do not adapt then they will join the dinosaur as a marker in history.]]> Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:35:09 -0400 -(Major Motoko Kusanagi) Ghost In The Shell

Humpty Dumpty not only fell down but was turned into an omelet and was served up.
Newspapers have been living in fantasy since the 90's. Numbers were declining before then. By 2001 Newspaper invested heavily in the internet or I should say the bubble. As far as Google goes the Genie has left the bottle. To be blunt Google and Yahoo are not the issue here. Newspapers retro economic model and news distribution model is the problem. I hate to say it but a pay per story model will not work because there are so many other sources. Even if you put a gag on AP. You still have Reuters, CNN, FOX and many more willing to fill those shoes.
Newspapers need to think differently. They need to realize they are not in the printing business but in the information business. Gather and delivering information. They need to lose the the Deadline mentality and think of a constant flow of information. They need to look at partnerships such as Amazon and Apple for news distribution. If they do not adapt then they will join the dinosaur as a marker in history.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127124/comments?source=feed#comment-434868 434868 Paid content will not work unless you have extreme specialty news that. The Wall Street Journal is very specialized nitch publication. Right now there are only a few examples of successful subscription services. Music, movies and adult entertainment are the only ones working.
The only way I see papers to have a very slight chance for paid content would be for Reuters and AP to have only paid content available on the web. We all that is not going to happen.
My personal guess is most large corporate papers are going the way of the dinosaurs. What will survive is small privately owned papers. Most likely you will see small weeklies and three days a week with strong local immediately updated web content.
Best hope papers right now is devices like the Kindle and iPhone to bring news content to the public. But my best bet for that to make any impact is 5 years.
]]> Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:30:52 -0400 Paid content will not work unless you have extreme specialty news that. The Wall Street Journal is very specialized nitch publication. Right now there are only a few examples of successful subscription services. Music, movies and adult entertainment are the only ones working.
The only way I see papers to have a very slight chance for paid content would be for Reuters and AP to have only paid content available on the web. We all that is not going to happen.
My personal guess is most large corporate papers are going the way of the dinosaurs. What will survive is small privately owned papers. Most likely you will see small weeklies and three days a week with strong local immediately updated web content.
Best hope papers right now is devices like the Kindle and iPhone to bring news content to the public. But my best bet for that to make any impact is 5 years.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/94799/comments?source=feed#comment-252929 252929 I have to agree with the Vegas analogy. The biggest issue for papers is not how to compete with the web but how to embrace the new media. There needs to be a serious rethinking advertisement revenue and circulation. Newspapers are following the same economic model for 50 years. There has been no change in the way do or think about doing business. I think will look back at this time as a Mass Extinction period in newspaper history because they failed to adapt. If you want an example of what not to do is look at Lee Enterprises (LEE). They are the poster child of poorly run Newspapers.]]> Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:21:59 -0400 I have to agree with the Vegas analogy. The biggest issue for papers is not how to compete with the web but how to embrace the new media. There needs to be a serious rethinking advertisement revenue and circulation. Newspapers are following the same economic model for 50 years. There has been no change in the way do or think about doing business. I think will look back at this time as a Mass Extinction period in newspaper history because they failed to adapt. If you want an example of what not to do is look at Lee Enterprises (LEE). They are the poster child of poorly run Newspapers.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/89070/comments?source=feed#comment-223425 223425 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:48:09 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/80410/comments?source=feed#comment-180498 180498 Fri, 06 Jun 2008 13:52:12 -0400