Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

With News, 'We Get What We Pay For'

Sick media must not die

By Matt Cantor,  Newser Staff

Posted May 10, 2009 11:15 AM CDT

(Newser) – We know the mainstream media is sick, but it doesn’t have to die, writes Frank Rich in the New York Times. When television appeared, people worried it would eat movies, Broadway, and radio; all these forms still exist, having “learned to adapt and to collaborate with the monster.” As “an essential part of a functioning democracy,” expert journalism must survive, too—and that means paying for it.

Sure, the Internet is rife with opinion pieces, but they’re “cheap” to make and based on good old-fashioned reporting. Investigative, hard-hitting journalism, on the other hand—the kind that told us about wiretapping and Enron—“can be expensive,” and takes expert reporters who “have to eat and pay rent.” “It’s immaterial whether we find the fruits of their labors on paper, a laptop screen, a BlackBerry, a Kindle, or podcast. But someone must pay for this content,” Rich writes.

Joe Roller of Boston carries a copy of the Boston Globe as he emerges from the subway stop in Harvard Square in Cambridge, Mass., Wednesday, May 6, 2009.
Joe Roller of Boston carries a copy of the Boston Globe as he emerges from the subway stop in Harvard Square in Cambridge, Mass., Wednesday, May 6, 2009.   (AP Photo/Josh Reynolds)
In this Feb. 9, 2009 file photo, the Kindle 2 electronic reader is shown at an Amazon.com news conference in New York.
In this Feb. 9, 2009 file photo, the Kindle 2 electronic reader is shown at an Amazon.com news conference in New York.   (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, file)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

Web advertising will never be profitable enough to support ambitious news gathering. If a public that thinks nothing of spending money on texting or pornography doesn’t foot the bill for such reportage, it won’t happen. - Frank Rich

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 5 comments
wwwonderer
May 11, 2009 6:44 AM CDT
I think part of your philosophy Thinker may hinge of the invention of the TV. Now more than ever the ones DELIVERING the stories are not the ones PROCURING the story. When ones has spent hours investigating, talking to people, checking facts, etc.; it's harder to go on air and report misleading facts. Your average news anchor, while probably has more information than gets disseminated, doesn't have the exposure to give the most interesting parts of the story.
Dr.Y.Dino
May 10, 2009 9:05 AM CDT
I agree with the author's premise regarding the need for good journalism, however this past election cycle showed how biased the mainstream media can be. People will pay for honest, unbiased "Journalism", but not the journalistic malpractice and blatant favoritism shown towards Obama, in both primaries and general elections. The media did little more than parrot the Obama talking points. And many outlets admitted as such, AFTER the election was over. Why pay good money for "news" when it's already available for free from DNC and Union websites?!?!?!?
kokuaguy
May 10, 2009 6:11 AM CDT
The pastor in the pulpit is responding to a call-- but food must be put on the table and a family needs a roof for shelter. President Obama spoke eloquently and seriously on this topic at the correspondents dinner yesterday-- listen to it on Huff Post-- he hit a home run, and not just with the jokes.

More Newser Stories

Times Prepares to Charge for Online Access

Newspaper-Less Future Nears in Some Cities

Print Times Not Quite Dead, But Hope Lies in Its Ashes

Angry Journalists Get a Website for Ranting

Is the Internet Bad News for Journalism?


NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne