I have always been under the assumption that traditional or “old” media has lost its’ mind. I have looked at traditional media (mainly newspapers) as a dying breed of communication that will not change with the landscape of technology. If you do not shift your paradigm you will die and currently.. that is what is happening. Traditional media never ranked high with me but I have started to see another side to this coin.
Recently the Wall Street Journal editor Robert Thomson blasted Google and other content aggregators as “parasites of the Internet.” I thought this was a little over the top and then I read a little deeper into the article.
I am going to stop there for a side comment. The simple fact that I decided to read the REST of the article before making a qualified decision is probably part of the problem. We are way… way.. way.. to ADD as a society and social media is not helping in that arena.
I am starting to understand the concept behind the value of premium content. I can see where WSJ is coming from when it comes to content aggregators. I can also see where the Internet model is changing the way we consume media. Rupert Murdoch at News Corp is trying to be innovative with the media shift but I do not see the WSJ making any HUGE strides to welcome the new wave of communication tools. Please, correct me if I am wrong.
There is going to come a time when the shift is over and traditional media will be mutated into a massive conglomerate of data and information. Until that time, Google and premium content portals like Wall Street Journal will need to become even MORE innovative than before.
The world is consuming content at an unbelievable speed. The question is… how do you monetize that consumption?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Google addresses newspaper woes (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Murdoch Calls Google, Yahoo Copyright Thieves – Is He Right? | Threat Level from Wired.com (tsurch.com)
- Google dubbed internet parasite by WSJ editor | The Australian (tsurch.com)
- Rupert Murdoch as Grumpy Piccolo Player (laf.ee)
- Google: Now an Alleged Internet Parasite (arnoldit.com)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c01effac-5f97-40a4-bfe0-a62555fd016c)
Stuart Foster
Ah traditional media, you should have started charging us for content in 1996 then you might have had an argument. However, the culture of free information has permeated the web to such an extent…that a pay per read model is going to lead to bankruptcy and failure.
MSM just needs to make the best of it and act like a competent blogger would. Success can still be had, the m.o. is just different.
Karl Peterson
From my perspective I think I want about 95% pure information, and maybe 5% aesthetics. That means premium content is at the absolute bottom of my list, because premium content is probably closer to 50/50. I don’t need the commentary, just that sweet, sweet information. And, on top of that, I’m not nearly as interested by premium content when I can get specialty content from hobbyists for free. The DIY movement is hitting the web hard right now, and the advancement of technology will move DIY into every corner of our lives over the next decade. To me, newspapers are beyond obsolete.
Jared O’Toole
I think things like newspapers will have to pullback from being free online.
We have to remember a lot fo the news we get on these agregators is from these premium news outlets where the stories are produced by journalists. If they die then those stories either disappear all together or we resort to bloggers who are getting better but by no means are their stories the same as something like the WSJ.