Our news, entertainment and media industries are under seige. It’s expected that at least 18 major newspapers in the states will go out of business in the next 12 months- and we’re not talking small local rags, we’re talking titles that were once the main game in their repective cities. Sure I hear you say, it’s there own fault. They failed to adapt. That may be right- or then again maybe it’s impossible to run a business when the competition is offering an alternative which is totally free.
But think about the implications for a moment, on a broader scale. I don’t know about you, but as much as I love and actively participate in the net and the social web, the idea of a world dominated by amateur content is scary. And if there isn’t a business model around developing professional content then that’s what we’re left with- a bunch of amateurs giving it their best shot. Sure some amateur content is brilliant, but amongst it there’s a lot of dross to sort through.
It’s simple, if media and entertainment channels don’t make money they can’t survive. If technology gets so good we can totally block out unwanted advertising; if we have the mentality that all information and entertainment should be free to watch; then we’re supporting a world where our professional content creators will be no more. Will the world be a better place if we don’t have professional news outlets reporting and critically analysing news? Will it be a better place if we don’t have talented professional creative people producing music and film and being rewarded for their efforts? Or would we be better off in a world where such institutions live side by side the ground breaking independent talent, that for the first time ever has a meaningful channel and opportunity to be discovered?
Personally I’m for the latter. But I fear at the moment we’re heading down Free Street. Free downloads, free information, free movies, unfortunately they all comes at a huge price. So how much did you want to pay for lunch?
What do you think?
I am sure that there is a need for paid, professional news sources. I don’t see a future for organizations that charge for repeating wire stories on paper. The whole distribution process is in competition with almost free distribution of electronic information that can be audio or video as well as editable and copy-capable. My 3G phone is closer than that awkward paper on the table and gives me access to papers that I never had before.
It is possible that we don’t need paid writers. The USA has so many people who do a great job of writing as an art form or interest. We also have a great number of institutions who distribute well done information for free. That doesn’t cover everything though.
We need something like the wire service that provides the key link between events and written reports of them. This business service needs to be paid by micropayments made to the writer who pays a set fee to the distributing organization. It would be an ebay of reports and ideas. The free market would determine the need for professional, paid writers.
I agree Kev, particularly when it comes to news professionals. Some of the current mainstream sources are dubious enough. I’m thinkin’ Pauline Hanson photos. So the idea of amateur news is scary.
It’s not so much the quality of the writing that’s the issue. It’s the accuracy of the reporting, the meeting of ethical standards and other qualities professional, credible journalists bring to the table.
I love reading the New York Times, The London Times and The Monthly online and would, and do, pay (for The Monthly).
It tastes delicious.
The music and movie industries are another issue.
But the phrase, ‘You get what you pay for’, comes to mind.
It may just take a while for the digital revolution dust to settle, revealing a world made up of Australian Idol winners and a never ending stream of YouTube novelty sensations, for us to realise it.