TNR BLOGS

July 05, 2009 | 4:05 PM
July 05, 2009 | 12:13 PM
July 04, 2009 | 11:18 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 05, 2009 | 12:02 PM
July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
12.11.2008
Buzz Off

Ron Rosenbaum is probably as powerless as the rest of us to prevent the sad fate that seems to await print journalism. But that doesn't mean that his jeremiad against Jeff Jarvis--a former ink-stained wretch who, with his Buzz Machine blog, has remade himself into one of the leading new-media gurus--isn't extremely satisfying. To wit:

Not all reporters had the prescience to become new-media consultants. A lot of good, dedicated people who have done actual writing and reporting, as opposed to writing about writing and reporting, have been caught up in this great upheaval, and many of them may have been too deeply involved in, you know, content—"subjects," writing about real peoples' lives—to figure out that reporting just isn't where it's at, that the smart thing to do is get a consulting gig.

Read the whole thing . . . or at least the first half of it. (Since Rosenbaum wrote it for a digital publication, he does start to ramble a bit toward the end, which reminds me of yet another great thing about print: concision!)

--Jason Zengerle

Posted: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 4:58 PM with 3 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

JosephCuomo said:

Jason Zengerle-

The NY Times has an interesting piece on the perils of web (& cable) journalism, a piece that focuses on the hoax recently perpetrated on Michael Crowley here at TNR (among others).

The Times mentions TNR, and quotes Crowley (though not by name):

www.nytimes.com/.../13hoax.html

November 12, 2008 7:57 PM

dbhuff said:

The internet is an echo chamber (or a series of them). There are blogger/journalists who do some actual digging, interviewing, etc. but they are rare. What many more do is organize, collate, and analyse other content. The worry I have is that this content is generally 1)free and 2) generated by print journalists. Love or hate 'em, you follow the chain long enough you'll end up at some actual story written by someone who was 'there'. However, it is already happening that the resources to pursue stories are falling with print and TV journalisms' decline. So we get soundbite/quite/he-said-she-said journalism instead of true investigation.

I'm generalizing here, there are clear exceptions (remember Bush's Nat. Guard 'letter'?) but the real concern I have is the steady decline of prime source material. Eventually, if the predictions are correct, this will be shrunken dramatically. outfits like TPM are starting to do real reporting. Which will pick up *some* of the slack, but these organizations have their very clear and intentional bias.

Root cause: people will not pay for relatively unbiased content. Even biased content they will tolerate ads, but little else. No one will pay subscription fees for news, there's too many outlets and too little real value. I wonder after the Grey Lady is laid to rest with her brethren, will real news suddenly be valueable enough that some enterprising website will spring up to provide it? For a subscription fee that allows a lot more journalism? That kind of digging casts money.

No offense to TNR, who I think is an exception in news quality and balance, but I worry about the business model.

November 13, 2008 10:00 AM

The Plank said:

Once, after Frank Rich cited an article of mine in one of his columns, a colleague told me this was "cause

November 17, 2008 9:59 AM