As some folks close to this blog already know, I became a father last week. In the months leading up to the big event, I did a lot of thinking about how different a world my son will be growing up in than what I grew up in. Admittedly, I was mostly intrigued by the superficial, like the kinds of pop culture icons that will seem totally ancient to him: Cheers will seem as old to him as I Love Lucy seemed to me. Nirvana will seem as old to him as the Beatles seemed to me. And E.T. will look as dated to him as movies like Inherit The Wind seemed to me.
But beyond the superficial, there’s a major technological gap between even those of us born in the 1970s and those being born today. Even with a father who worked in the early high-tech industry, I didn’t grow up in a world of gadgets. My son is likely to be using high-tech toys and playing with high-tech games that I couldn’t even conceive of as a youngster. But there are even starker divides among the living that I began to think about as I held my day-old son in the hospital while Willard Scott was on TV wishing people a Happy 100th Birthday.
Someone born in 1909 was raised in a radically different world than what we have now. If someone wanted to send a birth announcement across the country, the letter would’ve taken weeks to get there. If someone in Seattle wanted their relatives on the East Coast to hear their son’s voice, they’d have to wait until at least 1915 when transcontinental phone service was first set up. If a family wanted to take that newborn child to Japan and back, it would take them weeks or even months. And if that family wanted to be informed about events in the world that their son was growing up in, they relied on printed newspapers, often produced by well-heeled interests who would allow their personal biases to strongly influence how they presented the news to their readership.
It’s odd that with all of the technological progress we’ve made in 100 years, we still seem a little surprised to see this massively outdated way of keeping people informed going away. Even with TV and radio, newspapers still provided an advantage in that the consumer could easily skip over things they weren’t interested in, but all three of those media suffered from the same problem, that only a limited number of people had influence over the content. If a news outlet had an interest in hiding the truth or manufacturing a separate reality, it often had the means to do so. Taking that possibility to an extreme can lead to overly conspiratorial thinking, but it certainly was the reality sometimes. And alternate perspectives could often be sidelined.
The internet, of course, has blown the lid off of this. In 1909, if someone – or a group of people – could prove that something in the daily newspaper was intentionally misleading or false, most people would never find out. Today, liars in print journalism are quickly exposed. Fraudulent reporting is frequently called out. The internet has allowed us to fill in the gaps where the traditional media of newspapers, magazines, and television have failed us. The first major illustration of this was the Iraq War. People began to understand the extent to which they weren’t being properly informed by the outmoded media outlets of the 20th century, and we began to rely more on better avenues for keeping ourselves informed.
I remember telling people back in 2006 or so that the internet was about 2 years ahead of traditional media outlets when it comes to framing the issues in more truthful and more realistic ways. This has been true for issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Americans are now far more aware that this is a conflict where Israeli aggression shares as much blame as Palestinian terrorism for the deadlock. This has been true for gay marriage, where public opinion has shifted significantly as more and more people are exposed to the human reality of in-born homosexuality. And this has been true for universal health care, as the fiscal and functional superiority of socialist-minded European systems has become more understood (and Michael Moore’s movie arguably played a big part in that too). At the time, I predicted that a drug policy shift would be coming, and sure enough, it has now exploded onto the national scene, primarily because the internet community has been forcing the traditional media to catch up to its level of understanding.
In each of these cases, the traditional media has either ignored reality or actively tried to hide it. Why? It’s been done for a number of reasons – historically strong sympathies with Israel, concerns over alienating a large conservative Christian news consumer base, wealthy special interests, and sometimes just general inertia and a fear to challenge conventional wisdom. But whenever media interests are controlled by a small number of extremely wealthy individuals as they are now, it’s unrealistic to expect them to truly be the voice of the people or to take our perspective into account. Of course, as the tea-baggers are now demonstrating, not all of us have the ability to figure out when the wealthy are convincing us to believe in stupid shit in order to further their own interests.
Last week on the Colbert Report, Phil Bronstein of the San Francisco Chronicle gave a familiar response concerning the death of newspapers, warning that it cost the Boston Globe over a million dollars to investigate the Catholic Church pedophile scandal, and therefore things like that won’t get uncovered if newspapers go away. Of course, Microsoft once believed that since they spent millions of dollars developing operating systems, office productivity software, web servers, and databases that no one could do those things for free too.
But Bronstein isn’t completely wrong. There needs to be some new form of revenue for people who provide good journalism. The best opinion and area expert bloggers out there rely on good reporting and are just as lost as the rest of us without it. And I think it falls to us – opinion and area expert bloggers – to decide how much value we place on being informed, and to come up with a way to preserve and promote good journalism before it goes away. But I also think we have the technology and the resources to develop a system that’s far superior to what we ever got from the top-down controlled media empires we’ve all grown up with.
It seems extremely unlikely at this point that any pay-per-view model will ever take shape on the internet. Putting new content behind a subscription firewall doesn’t bring in revenue as much as it decreases the amount of traffic, which is arguably the more important commodity for sustaining a journalistic enterprise today. Today, there are still tens of thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of paid journalists across the globe putting their content online for free. But as newspapers cut back and fold, how much of that will we start to lose? I think it’s a very real possibility to get to Phil Bronstein’s worst case scenario, where big news stories simply have no one covering them.
I’m throwing out an idea here that I’ve begun to formulate, but haven’t shared with anyone yet. I want to encourage people to send me feedback on it. The idea is for a monthly “subscription” portfolio. (I put the word subscription in quotes because it’s actually more like a donation than a subscription) For instance, a standard portfolio would be like $20 a month, and you would set each dollar of that portfolio to go to a journalist that you rely on for good, accurate reporting. Or maybe it could go towards a group of journalists at a legacy outfit.
What I see this doing is two-fold. First, it creates a bottom-up way of rewarding good journalism. Second, it separates the legacy newspaper function that bloggers have trouble replacing (report journalism) with the one that they’re often significantly better at (opinion and analysis). Some journalists, if they choose, could provide perks for that $1 “subscription”, like a daily email or the ability to have specific questions answered and investigated. For instance, let’s say I want to “subscribe” to an Olympia reporter. Because I subscribe to that reporter, I may be able to have them pop into Frank Chopp’s office and get the answer to a specific question for me (as I’ve learned from experience, I will not get an answer if I email that clown directly). Maybe that privilege costs $5 a month. Who knows?
Again, these are just some preliminary ideas that I’m throwing out for discussion and feedback. I’ve been hearing a lot about catastrophic consequences to the death of print journalism. I don’t think this is an area where we need a government bailout or anything, but it may end up being entirely up to us in order to figure out how to sustain an industry that we’ve relied on in order to reach a new plateau in keeping us all better informed. It’s a beautiful thing to have right now and something I want to preserve for the next generation.
The basic idea sounds sound to me. You could set up a non-profit umbrella to take care of the web/billing end of things and have different subscription options for customers. Pay for certain issues (tracked with tags), reporters, individual articles, or buy access to the whole shebang.
Contgrats, on becoming a dad! Now go catch up on you sleep, you’re going to need it.
Playing with your idea….
A journalist makes between $30,000 and $50,000, depending on experience, according to the first salary site I found.
The journalist would responsible for paying his self employment taxes.
Benefits like health care, dental care, etc, could cost another $10,000
so $40,000 to $60,000 a year
At $5 a month, a journalist would need 666 to 1,000 patrons.
At $20 a month, a journalist would need 167 to 250 patrons.
Could a journalist sell himself to up to 1000+ people enough to make them feel good about continually gifting them money.
Could the journalist generate something interesting, month in and month out? Would it lead to even more hack reporting?
If the journalist sold a story to a news agency for big bucks would he give his patrons a refund?
It reminds me of the porn site model, where extra services cost a bit more. But last I checked, it was making money.
@1
Contgrats, on becoming a dad! Now go catch up on you sleep, you’re going to need it.
Thanks! Not having to go back to work until Monday has made it easier for me, but getting back into the 40-hour workweek again will probably be a bit of a challenge… :)
@2
Could the journalist generate something interesting, month in and month out? Would it lead to even more hack reporting?
Maybe. The idea is that if someone generates hack reporting, people will drop them from their portfolios.
If the journalist sold a story to a news agency for big bucks would he give his patrons a refund?
Probably not, but it might depend on the journalist. I’m kind of thinking that news agencies themselves would be radically different in this type of system as well. I’m not sure what kind of future there really is for groups like the AP. I guess I’d have to gain a better understanding of where they generate revenue from currently.
Thanks so much for the comments guys.
are u going to teach him to follow in bernie madoff’s footsteps?
manoftruth, are you going to teach your kid to be like Jeffry Dahlmer? Makes about much sense as your comment.
@5
If you want to understand his comment better, it helps to know that I’m Jewish and that he has a very long history of anti-Semitic remarks.
Lee,
Your politics are goofy and nonsensical…but congrats are always in order when the first is born.
My oldest (just got off the phone with SFC Mark) will be 32 come July. Born a twin, his brother didn’t make it, so that made him all the more special. As he was joined by two brothers and two sisters (another set of twins – boy-girl – in the mix) you quickly find that your life’s work stops being what you thought it was and starts becoming being a dad.
The best thing you can give your child isn’t technology or gadgets or widgets or whatever. The best thing is your time and your example.
While kids today run rings around us technically speaking, they still like to get in a cardboard box to pretend it’s a fire engine, or play cowboys and Indians with sticks. Some things never change.
The vast majority of kids turn out OK, so don’t give that half a second of thought. Those who stew too much over this end up with the wayward kids anyway.
Enjoy your infant – it’s downhill the instant he learns to crawl. Forget trying to keep your clothes clean – your shirt was intended to be a spit rag, so live with it. And anything you want kept in one piece needs to be either sold, stored, or placed higher than you can even reach. How it is that the tiniest of kids can climb up on the kitchen counter using the bread drawer as a step stool is a mystery of the universe.
When he’s 10, give him his own pocketknife. But keep directions to the emergency room in your wallet. And the mother in A Christmas Story was right: he will shoot his eye out. B-B guns are bad news.
Enjoy fatherhood – it’s the best.
The Piper
Thanks Piper, you reminded me that I need to finish up a little wiring in the kitchen before he starts to crawl. :)
As for the B-B gun, you’ll have to tell that to my father-in-law. I can only imagine what kinds of mischief he’s plotting for my boy right now.
Congratulations Lee.
Having a child is the best blessing in the world. My advice is to live in the moment and appreciate each stage of life as they go through it.
All too soon they are graduating and going off to college. Savor the moments – the sleepless nights and the poopy diapers means they are totally dependent on you. The complete trust as they go through elementary school is because you are their world. The need for independence as they mature is natural – allow them the freedom to be themselves and encourage them to live for themselves and think for themselves.
Good luck and enjoy the ride. They come out with their own personalities – it is truly amazing.
@7: Nice post Piper – I was thinking along the same lines.
The idea is for a monthly “subscription” portfolio. (I put the word subscription in quotes because it’s actually more like a donation than a subscription) For instance, a standard portfolio would be like $20 a month, and you would set each dollar of that portfolio to go to a journalist that you rely on for good, accurate reporting. ~ Lee, the bet welcher
Lee, you capitalist pig you. What happened to this Lee
back in September of last year?
col·lec·tiv·ism (kə-lěk’tə-vĭz’əm)
n. The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a government.
You’re one confused netroots, moonbat with the philosophy that you can actually hold two diametrically opposed positions at one time.
My advice? Lay off the herb.
Two thumbs up! The journey you have begun is wonderful!
I’m having a difficult time coming up with words to express how disappointed I feel at this post. As recently as last year I would have been thrilled to read that someone had become a parent. Now the scientific consensus is becoming more solid that we are headed either for a bold change to renewable non-global warming energy or to rapidly irreversible loss of humanity due to catastrophic climate change.
Where in your model does the concept of identifying and championing the most critical issues of our time enter into the mix?
It seems we need prophets as much as journalists at this moment. The current crop of journalists and bloggers haven’t managed to get the urgency of our situation into the American psyche.
I think there is a nubbin of an idea here.
One key may be understanding that only a small part of the content of a newspaper actually does involve in depth reporting. The keproper venue may not be in developing local weekly media or monthly media at the level of The Economist and the NY Times. Despite blogdom, many of us literati subscribe to these mag(as well as to Sports Illustrated and Business Week).
How are these more serious mags doing? In an odd way this may be the opening for a less strange version fo the stranger. I know their add revenue is falling too, but the death of the PI and the paucity of content in the Seattle Tit may provide an opening for a bigger and better Stranger.
One last point, despite a lot of BS (back slapping) about how wonderful we bloggers are, in my experience the number of really good commentators on blogs is very small. Lee’s essays on drugs. Goldy’s on taxes, Josh’s work at Publicola are really rare highlights of the blogosphere. I wonder if the time is not coming when the spots arising from the blog will coalesce into an effort, largely online, that is good enough to attract real ad dollars?
Congratulations on parenthood, Lee. I feel it my solemn duty to share this, this and this with you. (Had I known you were expecting, I’d have had you watch his bit on natural child birth as well.)
The only piece of advice I give to new parents is, always have the clean diaper ready to go on before you take the dirty one off. My wife has two: cut the raisins in half, and don’t sweat the blueberries.
As for monetizing content, information has generally become too commoditized for a subscription model to work all that well. Were I in your shoes, I’d take a closer look at how Josh Marshall runs Talking Points Memo. Do some crowd sourcing. Most of the reporting they did on the politicization of the DOJ was done through readers going through document dumps looking for stuff.
You can also do something like the TPMCafe, only with a Pacific Northwest focus. Draw in some of the faculty at the area universities, and have them discuss their specialties. People like Mark Thoma at the University of Oregon have experience with this medium, and they can be a resource for analysis. Darryl should be able to point you to other resources.
You might want to add a comment moderating system. Letting readers vote thumbs-up or thumbs-down on comments is a good way to do this without putting any extra burden on you.
Lastly, consider optimizing your content for RSS feeds. You do already include some advertising content, but you can also generate sponsor posts. The revenue stream will always be from advertising.
lee, i should’nt have made a comment involving your kid, i hate liberals, but your kid has nothing to do with it.
@15: DJ
the Cosby clip on how kids are brain damaged was very cute. That man is just plain funny.
@16
Fuck you.
@11
Do you want to try that again, except this time leave a comment that makes sense?
@15
Thanks Don Joe, my post here was primarily about the relationship between opinion bloggers and journalists, but with enough readership and advertising it’s certainly possible to do both. I’ve never tried to make any money blogging, and the vast majority of bloggers don’t have that capability. I’m not interested trying to set up a TPM-style blog. I don’t have the time or resources to do it. But I’ve been thinking a lot about how things might function in the future.
Lee Lee Lee:
Israeli Agression? With all the brokered peace proposals starting with Jimmy Cahhhhhhhhhrter and land returns and the Palestinians continue to call for the Israel’s ANNIHILATION?
It was the Internet that allowed Puddy to find the pictures where the Israelis had built hydroponic structures to provide gardens in Gaza and what did Lee’s Arab buds do? They destroyed it. Why? Cause they hated Israel more than they wanted self-sufficiency.
It was the Internet that allowed Puddy to find the sources where Yessir Arafat hid up to $4 Billion in Swiss Bank accounts and his widow lives on ~$22 Million a year in Paris. When first posted the HA weasels didn’t believe it.
It was the Internet which allowed Puddy to find sources where the Arab Leaders would say one thing to Western Reporters and preach hatred on their Middle East Web sites.
It was the Internet which allowed Puddy to visit Haaretz and the JPost and place a different view to Middle East life against the one you portray here.
It was the Internet which allowed Puddy to prove the “bombing” pictures placed on this and other blogs were faked but run by the print and visual libtard MSM.
See ya!
Lee Lee Lee:
Huh?
You haven’t been paying attention to the numerous studies where Brits are buying private medical insurance so they can reduce the queue times to get needed medical care being rationed?
My oh My as Dave Niehaus would say.
The physician in the UK is acting as their primary “gatekeeper” for costs. This is the primary feature of managed health
care Lee. The doctor acting as the cost gatekeeper is the master cost reducer and rationer for the UK government. His other role to be the “expert” clinician for patient, but this is now secondary.
Puddy ain’t looking forward to rationed health care. Is that what you want your child to receive?
@20
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
If the health care system in the UK is so bad, then how come it’s ranked so much higher than ours?
@19
I’m assuming that since you have the internet that you’re also aware of Israel’s illegal settlement activities, their willingness to target civilians, and their ongoing attempts to illegally confiscate lands from innocent Palestinians in order to exert more control over their territory, right?
As I said, it’s a problem of BOTH Palestinian terrorism and Israeli aggression. Believing that only one side is to blame is incorrect. But unfortunately, not only do you need to be well-informed to know that, you actually have to be an intelligent person too. Sorry Puddy, but you don’t cut it.
If we assume 20,000,000 listeners, 2% would come to 400,000. Hmm, too many. Let’s instead call it the 1 1/2% of the most rabid followers of Rush. Wow. He really inspired his troops to get out there to get and strut their stuff, didn’t he?
1 1/2% -heh There was a hundred times more interest shown this week in the gal who sang her heart out on the Britain’s Most Talented show.
Whoa!! Wrong thread!
My bad.
Lee Lee Lee, you cut it? Hyperbole at it’s zenith!
Sure Puddy knows about the Israeli actions. So what!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your focus on Israeli Aggression all the time fool. Today you wrote something almost balanced but not too fair. Israel has been attacked since it was formed in 47-48. Puddy been to the Middle East fool. Puddy talked to Arabs when Puddy was there. Puddy has worked with Israelis in America fool. Puddy understands the issues way more than you do bud.
But you keep your haughty attitude.
25 – Puddybud can I get on your list?
http://horsesass.org/?p=14999#comment-912045
Puddy – it’s useless talking to these Jew-hating fools. The whole idea of “innocent Palestinians” is very funny.
27… uuhh. excuse me. The author of the post, Lee, is jewish. Oh and Goldy is jewish as well.
I bet you didn’t know that.
Puddy knew this. That’s why LEE is so funny at times.
right wing: You need to identify yourself better to make the Puddy list.