Sign in or Join FriendFeed
FriendFeed is the easiest way to share online. Learn more »
Day 02 of the 30DC is live. Today is a big day about keyword research and Market Samurai. -
Robert Somerville
Link to a specific part of a YouTube video -
Interesting post from Matt Cutts on linking to a specific part of a Youtube video! - Robert Somerville from Bookmarklet
VERY cool! - Christopher T. Arata
Robert Scoble
Facebook just announced that Profiles and Pages become same thing. More details as they come here:
They call it the "Arrington" feature. - Robert Scoble
Mike Arrington can let as many people subscribe to him as he wants. - Robert Scoble
Profiles for Everyone, the slide says. - Robert Scoble
I read this on TC last week - something about Pages becoming more interactive with features that mirrors our Profiles. - Mona Nomura
I'm happy to hear that. - Adam Kinney
The stream is in real-time. - Robert Scoble
Rich content. Photos, notes, videos. Sounds a lot like friendfeed. - Robert Scoble
They just needed to remove the friend cap. Or have it approved by admins in certain situations. The fan pages were fine. Brands shouldn't have a "profile". - David Spinks
its the same foo , but different toilet :)- - Peter Dawson
Re "Sounds a lot like friendfeed.", Facebook is the new Microsoft, i.e. "embrace and extend" - Ken Sheppardson
OMG There are still people using Facebook? ;) - Peter Kruit
Now what is Ed going to do since he dumped all his people and had them move from his profile to his page? Poor Ed...more work now I'm afraid... - Wendy Merritt from twhirl
yes, 175m of them. - Jamie
Matthew: no. Now the competition gets interesting! - Robert Scoble
I've got a page. What do I do? - Christopher Harris
They dont' even start to implement until next week...don't do anything just yet. - Wendy Merritt from twhirl
It's just facebook recognising that there are only 2 kinds of entities. People and Organisations. Both have Profiles. As we say here at Udoogoo Organisations are people too. :) - Anton Mannering
@michellem Boot camp at Crowd Mountain is sweet, nice easy to follow info & video's thanks for Market Samurai Tips too,I'm glad to be a part -
Matt Cutts
Having lunch with @graywolf . It's like matter and antimatter :)
Robert Scoble
In FriendFeed, when you click on the "me" tab, how does it decide the order of the people you are subscribed to? (IE, why is Bret Taylor on top, but not Paul Buchheit?)
Alphabetical ? - Amit Agarwal
Amit: nope, that's not it. Cause then all you'd see on my tab is people's who's names start with "A" - Robert Scoble
Alphabetical + Recent Activity or most activity? - drew olanoff
if u r asking abt the 'subscribed to me' then its alphabetical... if its the general 'me' tab i only see my activity thr :-) - Aloysius from twhirl
Seemes alphabetical order to me but by the user first name... However it probably show FriendFeed power users first. - Orli Yakuel
I'm talking about the Subscriptions pictures on the right side. My list is Bret Taylor; Dave Winer; Fred Wilson; Kevin Rose; l0ckergn0me; Leo Laporte, mashable, michael arrington, Paul Buchheit, Scott Beale, Veronica. In that order. It doesn't make sense to me. - Robert Scoble
it has something to do with popularity - perhaps their number of subscribers... methinks... I always have Scoble, Winer, Mashable, Arrington, Rubel, Calacanis - even though those aren't my most recent friends, most paid attention to friends, etc. - Michelle MacPhearson
certain people have greater weight than others on this list, they are listed alphabetically. amber mac, chris brogan, chris messina are my first three. When I remove Amber Mac, then Chris Brogan, Chris Heuer, and Chris Messina are my first three. I subscribe to Amber Mac again and Chris Heuer disappears and Amber Mac is first again. - Phillip Jeffrey
what i would love is FriendFeed to "rate" my best friends or let me rate them and have only access to them. or give them priority in the ME tab - Ouriel Ohayon
Michelle: it's not that, either. There is some popularity algorithm, I think, but it's not strictly by popularity. It's not by who you find interesting, either. I wish it were. - Robert Scoble
BTW, anyone knows how this is work on Twitter? (user pictures on the rightside) Because I don't see any order what so ever there... - Orli Yakuel
Robert, if we all have the same people (more or less) on the sidebar, it has to be something with their popularity... - Orli Yakuel
Orli: it has something to do with popularity, yes, but it's not strictly by popularity. - Robert Scoble
Maybe by looks, but seriously it seems alphabetical order of popular users with the most followers. - Nir Ben Yona from twhirl
@orli the twitter order is based on when someone signed up for the service. - Phillip Jeffrey
Robert, i think it is 99% by popularity (and I'm very much ok with it, and still trying to find this 1%). I see people in my list that I have never comment on, or like their story for example. Jim, recent activity? I doubt that. Loic last update was in Monday, I'm sure there are more active user in my list than he.... It may be the popularity of this users updates, number of comments etc. - Orli Yakuel
Looking at it more, it seems to pull the 12 most popular people out of your list then arranges them alphabetically by first letter of name. I missed the alphabetical thing because I'm so used to alphabetically-arranged lists to be done by last name, not first character in a name string. - Robert Scoble
There is certainly some sort of popularity weighting going on. The order of my friends list in the "me" tab correlates to the ordering of stories in the "friends" tab. It'd be nice if I could have some sort of control over the weighting. - Paul Grav
Interesting. On my list i have the following order: Duncan Riley (1), Mona (10), Robert Scoble (11). On Duncan Riley's list #1 is Chris Brogan, but Mona doesnt have Duncan Riley on her top 10 nor does Robert Scoble, although both of them are subscribed to him. But still all lists appear to be alphabetical. Only conclusion i have is that subsciptions list is made by our preference (comments we make, likes, clicks perhaps) for a specific member and then arranged alphabetically. - Hayk
:-) R, well, this is what we've said before... duh! - Orli Yakuel
Orli: I told you I'm a slow learner. :-) - Robert Scoble
Will post comments to a users account that's not in my top and see if anything changes - perhaps "interestingness' does come into account w/ popularity algo. - Michelle MacPhearson
heh! I have to disagree with that, surely you are the fastest... - Orli Yakuel
Michelle: nope, interestingness has nothing to do with it. I think it's number of followers. If it were interestingness, Louis Gray would be on my list because he's the #2 most interesting person in my account. Everyone in my list is a highly followed person. - Robert Scoble
Robert, it is perhaps a combination of number of followers for a particular member and our "preference" for his/her posts. It is however certainly nothing to do with number of comments or posts by a particular member nor it has anything to do with number of subscriptions of the member. - Hayk
But you can't actually know how many people follows them... not through here anyway... - Orli Yakuel
Get Chris Saad teamed up w/ FF to make interestingness a part of it. Attention data is more important then pure # of subscribers. I like to see top folks, but think new people saying great stuff that's getting comments should be acknowledged within one's own friends list. - Michelle MacPhearson
I just unsubscribed from all the people who were on my list. Now I see Bradley Horowitz, Chris Brogan, Chris Messina, Dan Farber, David Sifry, Jeff Jarvis, Jeremiah Owyang, Jeremy Zawodny, Jess Lee, Louis Gray, Marshal Kirkpatrick, Thomas Hawk. I like this list even more than my top list. - Robert Scoble
I think the best solution will be to let us create our own favorite list. - Orli Yakuel
Orli: or at least make it due to interestingness, not popularity. - Robert Scoble
Top friends = Myspace = Friend Feed to the garbage can - Michelle MacPhearson
I agree with Michelle, either lets not have top based on number of followers or perhaps having a top list according to interestingness, whatever that might eventually be. Members can perhaps build their own list or choose to adopt the one from the the most "interesting" (not only tech-savvy though)! - Hayk
Michelle, this is not top friends. It's top users. I'd like to create my own friend list so I'll be able to quickly access content from people i trust. But due to interestingness should work as well, as long as it be a dynamic list. (anyway, if I had to create it myself, I'd leave some of the friends I already have on the list) - Orli Yakuel
d-e-f-a-u-l-t-s :) - Allen Stern
Allen: I get back at the defaults. I just subscribed to a bunch more people. But, yes, I wish I could change up who gets displayed on my little list. Then, maybe, it might mean something! - Robert Scoble
What's worse is the lack of women on the popular list. - Robert Scoble
RIGHT! - Orli Yakuel
Robert: then again, how do you define interestigness? Not sure number of "likes" is necessarily the measurement. Maybe according to the list of people i mark "like" the most. - Nir Ben Yona from twhirl
Good point Robert.... - Michelle MacPhearson
Bob, make sure you're familiar with the subtleties of "Hide". It can get very granular. You also may want to check out NoiseRiver. I haven't had a chance to try it. - Paul Reynolds
This is part of FriendFeed that is broken in my opinion. Same goes for recommendations. The answer is simple and will also provide FF with *extremely* valuable social metadata for their value as a search engine and personal "best of" algorithm to emerge later. Simply allow members the opportunity to rate their friends privately on a 1-10 scale. No social network has done this yet and it could be a very powerful tool for them/us to use. - Thomas Hawk
I thought it was by recent activity - Francine Hardaway
Robert, the example you gave is alphabetical by first name after a certain popularity threshold. - Louis Gray
if i have understand your mssg correctly i can say that FF puts ppl in the Subscriptions in an order you have subsribed to them. i.e. you are person 1. and you subscrube to person 10, 5, 6,2 and 101. the way they will be displayed in your profile it's the order you have subscribed to them => person 10 goes on top after him 5, then 6, then 2 and 101. - Apostolos Papadopoulos
Ed Dale
EDGE MEMBERS - VITAL MUST WATCH VIDEO - so important i needed to shout - regarding Day 6
Ok stampeding over to watch now :) - Allison
This is INCREDIBLE! If any 30DC comlpain, I will personally smite them. Does wikipedia have an article on how one would smite? Must look into that. - Michelle MacPhearson
Ed Dale
Wow! The 'breakout' info is fantastic research info - very cool! - Sharon Fleming from twhirl
Ed Dale
Are You Looking For A Reason For Things NOT To Work -
Thanks for sharing, that was an awesome post. - Stephen Ayer
Ooooh. That was a good one. - Christopher T. Arata
Ed Dale
I'm "Knocking One Off" in honor of the Market Samurai Team -
I'm "Knocking One Off" in honor of the Market Samurai Team
Ed Dale
The next TV show will be on Sunday night at 8pm Eastern!!
Robert Scoble
How do we save journalism? Since newspapers' business model is just disappearing very quickly, and advertising money is moving away from TV too, how do we fund journalism that we all need? Living off of $1 CPMs isn't gonna be it (that won't fund serious journalism).
Craig: I saw something yesterday that makes me think affiliate marketing is going to be a BIG deal in about four years. But will it be in time to save newspapers? We're going to lose quite a few in the next four years. - Robert Scoble
There's two issues here: one is that the product of journalism is so easily distributed now, it makes the purchase of its artifacts (the physical paper) unnecessary and even unseemly. - Jim Benson
Interesting. I don't think that funding of journalism ala carte like that will work that well. It might here and there, but the real problem is we don't know what kind of journalism we need until after we see it. Would anyone have done ala carte funding to break open Watergate, for instance? No. Not before the fact. Not very sexy for anyone. After the fact? Yes. - Robert Scoble
The second is that advertising was never quantifiable and never worked very well even in a highly regimented economy. Now, with a more distributed economy, blanket advertising is totally ineffective. -- To solve this we need to solve both problems. (1) dealing with a diffused distribution model and (2) dealing with a diffused economy. - Jim Benson
Jim: the second part (that advertising isn't quantifiable) is what is killing newspaper business models. If you're a business, where would you rather put your ad budget? The local newspaper or Google? I know where I would rather spend my money. - Robert Scoble
Value used to be assigned to two things (1) the object and (2) bulk eyeballs. Repackaging the assumptions of media is key here. They are no longer making a broadcast or a paper (a single big sellable object), but, rather, a lot of diffused things which is monetized in different - but not entirely dissimilar ways. What's funny is ... for news ... context sensitive ads are not applicable. At a school shooting story you don't want adds for automatic weapons, for example. - Jim Benson
Regarding ala carte: I'm going to do another week in Washington DC. It costs about $10,000 to take a video crew there and get media done for a week. If it weren't for a serious sponsor I'd never get to do that. But that's not even serious journalism. To really chew on a story like Watergate you need months of investigative and relationship-building work. Maybe even years. I doubt it could be done by an outsider. That means having millions to fund that kind of work. Ala carte just ain't gonna do that. - Robert Scoble
Jim: good point, the packaging and distribution of news is totally changing. Local news is moving to sights like Topix, too. - Robert Scoble
here's one idea via "If the public has a freelance budget, reporters don’t have to wait for an editor to approve their story. Now they can seize the day and pitch the public." for example, crowdfunding Scoble-like reporters/bloggers. something like a PBS for the blogosphere. - ~C4Chaos
What's interesting to me is that I'm now in a VERY small town, & the TV broadcast doesn't cover what happens up here in this tiny hamlet. So I'm more dependent on the local rag then I ever was back in the Bay Area. Perhaps creating newspapers that that focus on smaller geographical areas or "types" of people (SAHM moms, environments advocates, etc.) - which is, of course, what bloggers have been able to do with microniching. - Michelle MacPhearson
By thee way, it's interesting that FriendFeed is good for a topic that can be settled in about 20 back and forth messages, but isn't good for longer topics that need a longer effort. We could build an entire conference for a few days around this topic. It's important for our society to figure this out, yet putting all the pieces and all the thinking together on this is very difficult. Admob, for instance, has one tiny piece (really great ads for iPhone) that can play a part in saving journalism. - Robert Scoble
Unfortunately people are getting too used to free everything and seem to be surprised when people need to put food on the table. My wife is a magazine editor so I know first hand how the magazine industry is basically going downhill fast. People are getting laid off daily and taking pay cuts. I would have to say that the current magazine business model will be done soon after newspapers. Not even by virtue of sales and subs but by the reallocation and sheer lack of advertising dollars in this economy. - Scott Lockhart
C4Chaos: let's be honest, though, a crowd-sourced journalism is going to give us all the news we already get. Celebrities and sports. Who will fund some geek to do investigative journalism that sounds really boring? I just don't believe in the masses. I think we need a better idea for how to fund this stuff. And, there's a lot working against you. The people with audiences are too busy to tear themselves away from what they are doing. - Robert Scoble
I still think the key word is Quality. If institutionalized journalist will be able to bring good quality stories the people will buy their paper. In areas like army and politics the veteran publicist have the advantage since having better sources to deliver the stories, in other spaces like tech there's an advantage for internet journalists. Conducting profound inquiries that lead to... more... - Nir Ben Yona
Nir: I'm never buying a newspaper again, no matter how good the journalism is inside. Neither is my son. So, bad assumption there. Second of all, the $.50 you pay for the newspaper does NOT pay for the content inside. The advertising does. So, if the advertising disappears the great journalism disappears too (which is happening VERY rapidly in the Bay Area as the newspapers have laid off hundreds of journalists recently). - Robert Scoble
I might be coming across as a Kevin Kelly fanboi today but here he suggests that people like to pay because it is; "1) A way of connecting. 2) A sign of approval. 3) A vote. 4) It indicates an alligence with the maker. 5) It feels good to the payer, to support." Hopefully this model might work for journalism, music, and other forms of digital art and expression - jeremy ettinghausen
Nir: I can tell you with a very straight face that good journalism does NOT get readers. What does get readers? Comedy, celebrity, and sports and small, bite-sized news nuggets. - Robert Scoble
Nir: also, we live in a Google World: a world of niches. Some niches pay better than others. Great journalism about digital cameras or cars pays MUCH better than good journalism about world peace, for instance. Why? Because Google's advertising system is biased toward transactional audiences and rewards the creation of content that feeds those audiences. - Robert Scoble
Nir: I would have to disagree with you and agree with Robert - it's ALL about the advertising. That's why magazines give away subscriptions at ridiculous prices compared to their newsstand cost - guaranteed eyeballs to sell ads against. Even if readers were still reading newspapers and magazines at the same rate as they did in the 80s, if the advertising $ today were being diverted to more directed internet campaigns (Google, etc) the industry would still be in decline. - Scott Lockhart
good point on crowdfunding, Robert. but i was thinking more of a PBS model. (also been reading stuff on this topic on the PBS model had been successful for a long time now so its a good place to start. isn't that similar to crowdfunding but without the crowd necessarily dictating what stories to cover? speaking of media and journalism, maybe we can get Danny Schechter (aka "News Dissector" who produced Weapons of Mass Deception) pitch his two cents on this topic. - ~C4Chaos
Seems to me there are two problems at work: producing paper is quite costly on the expense side (big fixed costs, typically union labor, etc.). And on the revenue-generating side, there seems to be not enough of what folks want to read (not enough local, overreliance on AP wire, etc.). I'd argue that papers' reporting isn't local enough/specialized enough to have value. With the right local/specialized content -- some professionally reported, some user-generated -- why wouldn't PPC work for the papers? - Eric Johnson
Oddly I was just thinking about this subject. Unfortunately I came up with very little. One possibility is to create an Xprize type mechanisms so people are richly rewarded for the often unrewarding work of journalism. The key isn't newspapers per say, but supporting the idealism of those who take on the sacred work of providing societies' mirror of truth. This is a distributed people's journalism rather than one organized around artificial organizations like a paper. - Todd Hoff
The PBS model will not work on the web. Why? Because the web decentralizes and disaggregates things. PBS worked because of the bundling of things together. Yanni raises more money for them than Nova does. But on Web bundling Yanni with Nova makes no sense. - Robert Scoble
Robert: I'm the founder of Spot.Us (mentioned above). I agree that Water Gate wouldn't have been pre-funded, but reporting like this could merit pledges. Right now is in a VERY early stage (pre-alpha really) - but I do think it's a potentially new revenue stream. Not a silver bullet (I don't think there are any silver bullets), but it can't hurt to try ;) No matter what: I want to thank you for bringing the topic up - it's incredibly important. - David Cohn
To continue the idea of support create a legal fund to help fight the battles. Lobbying groups to help fight the muzzle. Organize like a church or non-profit so people could contribute to a support network for journalists. Driving journalism solely through profits may not make sense. Journalism a higher social good packaged like spam. Maybe it should be organized more like other higher callings we appreciate? - Todd Hoff
Private and public funding seems like a more likely avenue to save journalism. Paper press though is all but dead. - Todd Jordan
I'll go along with Robert, where does an advertiser put his funds? Naturally they want to market to people in their market and not just splash an ad out for people who are not in their market to see To survive the newspaper industry will have to start going further into targeting their ads to a market instead of the the shotgun effect. - Scot Duke
I know nothing about journalism, I'm just a professional code monkey. But I have a crazy idea - what about something like similar to to fund journalism? - imabonehead
Gregory: I think you would be surprised at how much news that is spread on the web was first broken by paid journalists, even today. I think the real issue is that the method of information delivery is secondary. It is more about having a free and independent "press" (or wordpress) that holds us all accountable and can provide its contributors a living. So losing newsprint itself is not a loss, but losing the 1000s of reporters and writers that are able to do what they do because of it, is... - Scott Lockhart
@imabonehead is a BIG inspiration for my project: - in fact, I often just explain it to people as or Donors Choose for journalism. - David Cohn
David, cool. Didn't see the url mentioned earlier by other posters. It's still an early Saturday for me. :) - imabonehead
Robert & Scott: I totally understand your point and i do agree when it comes to day-by-day journalism. After all, it is a lose-lose situation for the institutionalized papers, they can't fight the speed and accessibility of internet news and info, especially for busy people like us who have no time for long articles reading while working. On the other hand i do find niche journals like Science Magazine or Nature for example, able to maintain worldwide readers with quality publication and pro debriefing. - Nir Ben Yona
Nir: I would have to say that I be surprised if they are doing well... Magazines and newspapers are fairly different, yet similar in a lot of ways too. The magazine format with its combination of design and short and long form journalism is a little harder to replicate online and hasn't been done all that well to this point. If you want to see what is happening at least in magazines, even with very niche titles: check out There's a whole blog devoted to publications going under - Scott Lockhart
<continue> with experts sharing their thoughts and researches. That is a quality journalism that attracts readers. Robert, i'm sure your 14 years son won't mind getting a monthly pro car magazine or a "PC Mag" alike version if he's into tech or gadgets. My point is that there is a place for quality and somehow (maybe naively) i'd like to think some people do go after interesting stories and not just "Celeb Gossip". Maybe it is the same as after the bubble burst, sort of a cleaning occurrence... - Nir Ben Yona
in an ideal world there would be a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for journalism where journalists could practice their craft free (or almost free) of corruption. a combination of philanthropy/non-profit/donation and subscription model as opposed to journalism run as a for-profit business would save journalism standards. for example, The Nation (see is running on a combination of subscriptions, advertising, and donations. - ~C4Chaos
<continue> to let the good prevail. In my vision, in 10 years, the big newspapers will have a weekly internet edition threw their website and a weekend edition with more investigative stories. - Nir Ben Yona
This year in magazines these are the losses in advertising revenues for some very established US magazines. What were are seeing here is just destroying their already small profit margins: Entertainment Weekly (-16.8%), Kiplingers Personal Finance (-15.3%), US News & World Report (-30.3%), Home (-30.9%), and Scientific American (-20.3%) Lucky (-12.2%), The New Yorker (-20.1%), and ESPN The Magazine (-14.8%) - Scott Lockhart
sorry for possibly over-commenting this thread, but it is a subject close to my heart and my shared back account. :) Cheers! - Scott Lockhart
Nir: you're wrong. My son thinks magazines are pretty worthless. He reads MacRumors and Engadget, both of which bring him much better and more timely news than any magazine can (and more of it, too). FastCompany is actually doing very well compared to the magazine industry, which is interesting (it grew last year). But the category it is in lost several competitors, so overall the trend is right and probably will catch up with FastCompany at some point which is why we're investing online more and more. - Robert Scoble
Scott: but maybe it is part of the global recession that has dropped margins everywhere, not just in journalism. - Nir Ben Yona
Here's the process: 1. End of newspaper advertising ends artificial subsidy funding of "quality" journalism; 2. Supply & demand takes effect; 3. We start to get our first picture of what value people will put on different types of information. - Dan Conover
I'm interested in saving journalism, but the question posed here seems to be about funding. Guess it's a chicken-and-egg thing. Seems like the distance between the reader and the writer has knocked a lot of the middle folks out of the picture, and it's harder to justify the kind of money they're asking for. When it comes to value in journalism, however, I still prefer hard facts over style, design, even spelling and sometimes grammar (and I'm a picky art director). Trust costs more than packaging? - ɐ ɯıʞ sıɹɥɔ
We'll know an awful lot more about the future shape of journalism about a year or so after the 20th century metro newspaper system collapses/goes on life support (I'm guessing by summer of 2009, but that's a guess). But the one thing I'm pretty sure about is this: There won't be one way of funding journalism, and we won't lump everything that gets reported under that one heading anymore.The fundamental idea: There should be a logical connection between the info you produce & its supporting revenue streams. - Dan Conover
Robert: i guess i'm a dope concerning nowadays kiddies. As for FastCompany, i do hope you will keep delivering the good stuff as long as possible. BTW, do you agree with my conjecture of a daily internet edition and weekly hard-copy version, coming up in few years? - Nir Ben Yona
I think you will get a mixture of rich corporations and individuals trying to fill the gap, like Google. But pushed out from the security of the newsroom, there will also be a flurry of entrepreneurship among the journalists who are displaced. Don't assume that subscription won't work in the future, either. It may well be that newspapers have actually been obscuring the need and opportunity for a higher quality journalism. I believe The Economist has achieved impressive growth against the secular trend. - Tim Penn
journalism doesn't necessarily imply newspapers, does it? - Adri Munier
No, but about 90% of what "A-List" blogs do is NOT journalism. I'm no authority, but I'm beginning to see why people say there is a difference. "Editorial Discretion" Oh, @Tim, you're absolutely right. Online and print content can thrive in a subscription model if there is value. The mistake newspapers made was giving it away in the first place. - Andrew Feinberg
And the general newspaper model makes zero sense now. A daily packaged product can work for niche content, but who reads the entire newspaper? I use the big paper websites for different reasons (local, national, international, etc). Political news? Niche publications. I buy (or sometimes expense) Roll Call, CQ and CongressDaily. People in the Cable/Internet/Telecoms buy CommDaily and WID. There are tons of other niche trade pubs that are thriving. It's the blob of daily newspapers that needs to be split up - Andrew Feinberg
It's important to realize that journalism is a process, not a product. Newspapers might not survive but the craft of Journalism will. The question is... how? There are no concrete answers right now - but I do think that practicing journalists are earnestly trying to figure that out (for the first time). @Robert - I don't think Ala cart funding for journalism will lead to Brittany Spears stories. There are ways around that - I'll try and write a blog post at with more details. - David Cohn
Since there is no known answer to this question, the most important thing to do right now is launch as many possible experiments in as many possible directions, increasing the likelihood that we will find good answers a little faster. But it's vital to understand that this is essentially *research* -- practical research, but research nonetheless. And in research, the dead ends are... more... - Scott Rosenberg
This is currently an unsolved problem, a hard concept for some to grasp. Every possible answer--rich people! foundations! internet advertising! crowdfunding!--has some pretty glaring defects. No one has the solution yet. Right now the most promising developments are Talking Points Memo (, funded by ads and reader support and doing investigative journalism of the kind we want; Pro Publica, funded by rich people ( and, which is crowd funding. - Jay Rosen
Jay lists 3 good funding sources. Also consider: Nonprofit corporation (supported by pledge drives, sponsorships, foundations, etc.); true-cost intelligence subscriptions (as with STRATFOR) and smart amalgams of keyword/display/classifieds/and various affiliate-type programs. And where I think it gets REALLY interesting is when you start creating information tools that have specific value to the end user. You add value, you take profit. - Dan Conover
The trick? In Web journalism, you're paying for people costs. You're not paying for trucks and paper and ink and presses. So when people say "The Web can't pay for journalism" what they're REALLY saying is "The Web can't support newspapers and TV stations." - Dan Conover
The thing I'm really looking forward to putting my energy into is developing some kind of smart, shared business infrastructure that would connect individuals who make content to all the reliable services that a new-media businesses will need to make money. You might be able to make some money writing useful articles and selling your own ads and doing your own site, but that's not a bright long-term prognosis. And yes, I'm a newspaper guy who signed up for a buyout last week. - Dan Conover
Won't journalism always win Pulitzers? Which brings a sort of global cache and prestige... which is what newspapers hope to gain, such that the world will pay attention, right? That's at the highest level. There can always be prestige and prize for journalism at all levels... even if it has to come from new sources. - Christopher Galtenberg
it's so easy... just do as in Italy, where crap newspapers (most all of them) are financed by the government! - Luigi Centenaro
Newspapers are thriving in the ethnic market, primarily at the local level. The reason for the success is that their readership is starving for intl/local ethnic information. Weeklies are the way; most papers are run by journalists from their respective countries-it is extremely streamlined. Journalists need to take the initiative with sales professionals and open up local, weekly newspapers that serve specific niches/markets/topics. Also, home delivery is a must, as is a strong grass-roots component. - Harold Cabezas
Robert, I think you could ask a different question here, too. Was there a journalistic failure running through the housing bubble and its aftermath? In his new book, Robert Shiller suggests there was, but he made the arguments clearly before about the tech bubble. Given the scale of importance of this story, if we ask what might journalism have done differently, the answer might also suggest useful commercial or funding structures. - Tim Penn
Altrustic funding isn't the answer. Newspapers will have to stand on their own merits just like any capitalist enterprise. I'd like to more Nritish style - Hutch Carpenter
British style that is. More point of view included in the reporting. You win on your point of view. - Hutch Carpenter
Journalism needs a couple of things (1) a lower distribution cost structure and a lower news acquisition cost structure. If you look at online news folks (like Scoble, others) they've found an effective way to lower the distribution costs of their journalism. To lower news acquisition cost you need to look for alternatives to collecting news, whether it's UGC or leveraging a freelance network like is doing with TurnHere (disclosure - I work for TurnHere). - Morgan
<continued morgan> (2) the big media companies need to move quickly into diversified news outlets (as has been mentioned above) reducing the number of pages in newspapers, moving from trying to bash the mass over the head and instead move towards aggregating the long-tail of news consumers to roll up in to a critical mass not through one communication vehicle (i.e. a paper) but through many diverse channels. Finally they need to go for more sponsorship money and less ad money as we've seen in other biz. - Morgan
whatever it is can't be based on lame-O advertising cuz i NEVER click those. - Susan Beebe
One of the things implied in all this (at least for me) is the idea of completely self-selected news. It's an exciting development to be able to do that, but what are we missing? Scoble hits it on the head when he says Watergate reporting wouldn't get done under this model. If we're going away from news bundlers like newspapers, can we find a new business model to finance serious journalism? And what does a society without serious journalism look like? - Tom Landini
I don't like that I can't tell when these comments occurred. I have no idea if I should bother to comment. Has the conversation moved on or do people come back and talk more?? And what's with not being able to use paragraphs? Lots of text is a pain to read. - Dawn
Lots of interesting thoughts here. I have to say that this very subject is on my mind daily as I personally aggregate Hispanic news and have done so for 3 years to the tune of 40k+ posts. Just one niche among many but I worry about the loss of journalists especially since at least within the Hispanic community it is perceived that there aren't enough journalists covering issues... more... - Tomas
Dawn: yeah, time stamps on comments would be very cool. Generally I find a conversation on FriendFeed can go on for about a day. Same with this one. it's pretty much died out, even though a few interesting comments have trickled in today. - Robert Scoble
Then FF will never go mainstream. "Non-passionates" don't want to have to be plugged in 24/7 in order to be able to participate. Thanks for the clarification. - Dawn
I'm actually doing a three-post series on how the internet has changed the economics behind the publishing business this week on Eat Sleep Publish. I'm also doing an event (a mini mini version of what Robert suggested above) in Seattle this Septermber to get smart ppl together to round-table about what the business model is. Robert - you going to be in town? - Jason Preston
All I can say is - I hope newspapers will not go away - since I enjoy the print medium and the ability to carry my paper without having to plug it in every time. One of the reasons why i pay for my Economist is the convenience of having it, rolling it up and enjoying it without having to wait for XP or MaxOS to boot and show it. And even with always-on OSes (like Palm and iPhone), still enjoy the feel of paper. - Sanford
Further to my comment about Robert Shiller and the role of the press in positive and negative feedback loops, a full review of the book is here, with further links out. - Tim Penn
Question: WHY do we want to save journalism in the first place? Why not let it die its own death like fax machines and pagers. - Mukund
In the UK we have something that will buck the trend: the BBC. It's funded by a "licence fee', which you have to own BY LAW to have a television in your house. I.e. If you don't have a licence, you're busted. Sure, the BBC has to justify the fee annually, but the UK population seems, on the whole, happy with what it gets: unique, high quality local and national TV, Radio and web uninterrupted by advertisers. A place where in depth "Because it's important" type journalism may still be able to flourish? - Tom Beardshaw
First, get the facts on ad revenue for newspapers. Yes, ad revenue is shrinking for papers and they have had to shed bureaus and reporters. But they still get more money for their paper ads than their online ads. And they aren't standing still, they are evolving as well, the pressure of all the blogs and podcasters has forced all the major news sites to completely transform with all kinds of user-friendly features. And you still find the Murdochs of the world buying papers. This story is far from over yet. - Prokofy Neva
I cover Bakersfield City Hall. It is not big and glamorous enough for these national-oriented projects like ProPublica. Yet I doubt I could be funded by donations because the crowd who would donate is similar to the crowd that runs for office -- politically slanted. I could get funding from one of the conservative camps by being sympathetic to them. But how does that serve the community? - James Geluso
The REAL problem is there really isn't much "legitmate" journalism out there anymore anyway. As a former reporter, what newgatherers are putting out there for average citizens day in and day out is absolutely pathetic and, many times, inaccurate. With reporters having to do more with less, the problem continues to grow. Advertisers should "buy" with more caution than ever...or not at all!!! - Jennifer Windrum
Newspapers as we know them are doomed because they're no longer a sustainable product in the era of the internet. The question is why should the whole industry (journalism/publishing) die because of the medium (paper). They must figure out a way to become profitable through the new medium (the internet). I think The Wall Street Journal has the right formula. Not so much the The New York Times. - moncef b
Mark Cuban was onto something with sharesleuth: The company funds good investigative journalism by trading on the information in the financial markets first, publishing second. Barring that, I believe it may be time for public journalism as ~C4Chaos argues. If people really want good journalism, they should be willing to pay for it. - David Pennock
For any here interested in another take on this, I have been working on a platform around democratizing patronage for journalism, announcing it this week. It's been a labor of love for the past eight months, in pre alpha now. - Israel Mirsky
Other ways to read this feed:Feed readerFacebook