It's a lark, of course, but like the other larks from Blodget and his Silicon Alley Insider, it's rooted in financial rigor...
Well, in truth, we'd like the whole thing, but the New York Times won't survive in its current form, and we're not thrilled about the idea of losing our shirts. We're also not eager to be villified by the labor unions, newsroom, and Columbia Journalism Review for doing what needs to be done to save the business. So here's what we're going to do instead.
I am really worried about the Times and the handful of other great American dailies and news organizations that are struggling to find a new business model in the digital age.
It's not that the newsroom at the Times isn't doing great work (I love what they do), it's that the business of employing thousands of of journalists, printing on paper, maintaining subscriber lists and selling expensive ads is changing dramatically.
I hope someone is able to effect change at the Times, to make it make sense in the age of iphones, web advertising and who knows what else. But like Blodget I fear it is not Arthur Sulzburger Jr., the current chairman of the New York Times Company.
Very important and very well put!
ReplyDeleteSadly, becoming new CEO of the NY Times is going to be like becoming governor of California. The interests that have put the organization into its current state are very strong, and it will take someone with uncommon charisma and vision to effect the necessary change.
ReplyDeleteActually, this applies to every print newspaper in America, which are basically in full contraction mode now. It's awful that so much of human knowledge is dependent on a brutally flawed advertising model that is unaccountable to its customers.