http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2008/2397940.htm

He’s very right when he says one of the problems is that in any other industry, they just adapt to the internet and don’t see it as an “us or them” kind of issue – If you look at any industry which took that approach (for example the music business failing to grasp how it was easier to get illegal downloads than legal ones for too long) its now struggling.

The value in a newspaper is the relationship it has with its readers – the daily echo online (if you ignore most of the amusing comments) is a centre of authority because of its journalists.

With the trend towards information overload, that c.o.a. value will increase and ad rates to those places rise. Take off the cost saving from not printing a paper, can it be viable… who knows.

Indeed. I, personally, am optimistic for both.

Journalism will have a much easier time reinventing itself than the industry because people tend to be more willing to risk the future of democracy than risk money.

The industry will be saved by the fact that it is about money because people tend to be willing to do much more for money than for democracy.

It’s just they are two different kinds of people. And, undoubtedly, the restructuring of the industry will be more painful on account of the financial aspect.

I guess there’s a ‘news saturation’ point for a lot of people (certainly there is for me!) and after you’ve accessed news via the radio, tv, Twitter etc during the morning, would one log onto a news website for more – let alone buy a paper?

Some stories attract exceptional interest, but look at the Daily Mail; they’ve given up all pretence at a serious website and have made themselves, essentially, a second Heat online. SEO is everything, the reader is nowhere. It’s just tawdry window dressing and it can’t last.

However, I am optimistic about our prospects as journalists. Newspapers need to throw out ideas about targeting ‘demographs’ or ‘audience sectors’, and instead start participating in conversations.
Liveblogs of events get more comments in a few hours than the average letters page gets in a week, I bet, and it’s because everyone is involved.

Journalists need to talk to people, and listen – online and in the real world. You make an excellent point when you say: “We might come into that network somewhere but we’re not at the heart of it”.
Because I think we assume we should be at the heart of it; that our brand deserves to be there because it’s local, and established, and (of course!) trusted.
This assumption is a fairly major obstacle to overcome but it’s vital that we do. Otherwise we just get further and further away from people’s conversations, and we will never get to join in.

Great post – sorry if I got your back up with the post about sub-editors!

I too am looking around for people to help me answer these questions. Like you I have a few ideas that need formulating into something coherent.

Things I think I know:

- Generally people trust individuals rather than faceless organisations
- Recommendations of news stories from friends *is* a distribution method.
- The definition of “friend” online is different to in the physical world (think Facebook friend). It is perhaps closer to say that friends online are peers or your network.

Somewhere in this is a part of the answer to what you’re saying. If the parish pump journalist is tied into a network of people interested in that parish then there is a value and interest in their work.

It may not be enough to sustain a full-time job though and this leads me onto the vague notion that as journalists we are – as you say – approaching this problem the wrong way around.

We have to force ourselves, as you’re doing, to ask what exactly is it that people want from us?

When you drill down to it, people read news they can use – either socially, or because they want to effect (or prevent) change. Those are the instincts I’m trying to drill down to with Help Me Investigate.com, which I’ve been bidding for money from the Knight Foundation and 4iP. If we get the funding (and even if we don’t), I hope we can test some ideas about how to support journalism, rather than focusing on how to keep the news industry alive, which is something else entirely.