Home »
Eleventeen reasons Gerry is wrong
By Ian Cobb
Obviously I don’t agree with some of the points made by Gerry Warner in his column this week; Cute kitty pictures or incisive journalism?
I do agree that mainstream media sucks on so many levels it is ridiculous and the problem is obvious – mainstream media is not run by professional journalists who value the truth over the dollar.
But to suggest that the only truth worth contemplating is that on a printed product is akin to an early 1880s person huffing and puffing about how the automobile is but a fad and one should keep investing in horses.
To say that a newspaper must come in the traditional and extremely archaic ‘paper’ form for it to be worth anything also flies in the face of the reality impacting today’s rapidly declining print newspaper industry.
Flat out – good journalism is more evident in digital media nowadays, as there is much greater independence in terms of ownership (less corporate control equaling muzzling of messages that don’t fit in the corporate scheme of things). Not all online-only media is some wannabe blogger blabbering away, just as not all print newspapers are soulless shells of former glory days.
It’s also ironic, Gerry, that you hold such a position yet your often controversial opinion pieces appear ONLY online and not in print nowadays. Why? Online media like e-KNOW – a digital-only ‘newspaper’ – does not bend to the narrow-minded pocketbook rules designed by the same boardroom arseholes who keep the print media slaves’ paycheques as tiny as possible, while they laugh their way to the bank.
Today’s print media is thoroughly purchased and controlled by the corporate world.
You know that as well as I. We’re both old print hacks who experienced numerous pains in our asses thanks to corporate ladder spiders who didn’t want us to tell the truth because they might lose two quarter page ads.
Think of Andrew Coyne’s recent and admirable ethical stand… think of your own past experiences and think of the ‘journalism’ you’ve been seeing in print papers – national on down to local – in the past decade or 15 years. Honestly, how’s that working for you?
Most of it simply pisses me off it’s so lame, contrived, shallow etc. Don’t even get me started on TV ‘journalism!’
As for the cute kitty pics… they don’t exist on the digital media sites I visit. By media, I am referring to actual news sites. By the way, forgive me for calling e-KNOW a newspaper, as there is no paper involved. What is the same is the content. It is simply being provided in a modern, vastly more economical, environmentally kinder and far more widely reaching medium.
Are you stating in your piece that all social media and all websites are to be considered ‘media?’ Then I must again howl in derision. Sure, Facebook and the like are stuffed full of cute kitty pics and nonsense, but it is also chock-a-block with shares of incredibly powerful journalistic work, the like one cannot see in print because of the nature of some of the pieces and because of the length.
You want in-depth? How many column inches does that require? Well, online newspapers like e-KNOW don’t need to worry about jamming all the news that is fit to run into a 25% editorial dummy. If you need 10,000 words in an online media format, you got it!
Every single column you’ve had published in e-KNOW continues to linger in cyberspace, forever available for anyone who wishes to search it out and read it; or they can drill down inside e-KNOW and find it, or more easily, type in a keyword and it instantly appears for your reading pleasure. Google is far more a writer’s friend than the expensive limitations of print.
A column you get printed in a print-only product lasts for a day or a week or a month before it is used to mop up puppy piss, wrap fish or dishes, becomes recycled or is used to light a fire. Sure, intrepid types know to go to a newspaper office to search the morgue for past issues, but how much of a pain in the ass is that in today’s busy world? On e-KNOW, it’s all right there. On every other digital media site – it’s right there; easy peazy lemon squeezy.
Warren Buffett is a brilliant man. He’s also something like 347 years old, or so an online source tells me, but that hasn’t stopped him from seeing the great potential in a good newspaper. And guess what? Buffett sees the endless potential in the FUTURE of newspapers/media, without being hung up on the print anchor. He sees the value in the changes that are taking place. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t be investing.
Buffett is aware that forests do not need to be wiped away so the curious can be sated.
Today’s print media industry is the same as it was 15 years ago – it’s about real estate. It is about preserving the behemoths that anchor them all to the past; the printing press infrastructure.
Unfortunately, the cost of running printing presses and buying paper continues to rise, and salaries in the industry continue to stagnate or shrink as a result. Fewer people are on staff to do the work that used to be done. You want an incisive piece? Good luck with that when the poverty-level wage earning kids right out of J school are cranking out supplement shlock instead of covering the news as it is happening in their coverage areas.
Yes, there is a tsunami of shit on the Internet. The annoying click whore ways of the mainstream media’s online presence plays a big part of it (for an example, see the headline of this piece). And the media sources pumping out that crap are as likely still the ones anchored to the printing presses as they are online only singular focus tripe sites. The tripe sites are immediately obvious, too.
We don’t need paper, Gerry. What we need is media ownership letting the professionals run the editorial end of things again. The truth must become the focus again, and not the enemy, as media corporate boards see it. Because the truth always hurts and that hurt translates to lost sponsorship (advertising etc.).
From the time we first got into this newspaper game, and you were lucky enough to be in it a fair piece before I, when corporate weasels weren’t running the show, newspaper editors have gone from being gatekeepers of the truth to truth gargoyles, stuck on ledges, too frightened to move for fear of losing their jobs.
Another thing I agree with you about is the Buffett quote: “Skimpy news coverage will almost certainly lead to skimpy readership.”
That is absolutely true and it has nothing to do with newsprint. Again, it has everything to do with journalistic integrity, courage, effort, consistency and unflagging support from the money people.
If the current print newspaper community gave a tiny crap about doing a good job of local coverage, as Buffett correctly suggests they must, why do they continue to slash local resources and centralize their operations?
You are lashing out at the wrong thing, Gerry. The Internet didn’t fire the shot that is slowly killing print newspapers. That shot was fired in the 1980s when greed and rapid ascension to riches became the norm. That was when media of all forms began to become impacted and a slime began to grow on the always-tweaked ‘truth’ being packaged for mass consumption. That was under the watch of the print industry and it continues today, as their printing press anchors drag them under the cyberwaves.
And despite Warren Buffett’s interest in buying some newspapers, the industry ain’t doing so great hereabouts (B.C. and Alberta), with growing talk of scale-backs and mergers of big city dailies.
In closing, don’t lament the loss of newsprint. Rejoice at the rise of more independent media outlets, run by professionals, that is resulting in a second coming of freedom of the ‘press.’