Picking Cherries at The Guardian
Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation and now the New York Times have publically announced plans to make readers pay for online content, but not everybody is following suit…not yet, anyway. Alan Rusbridger, editor of the popular English daily newspaper The Guardian, has been most vocal about his paper’s intention to continue providing its online content for free. Yesterday Rusbridger gave reasons both ideal and practical in defense of free online content.
The most practical reason is money. Online news has given visible companies like The Guardian and The New York Times unprecedented advertising revenue. Free online content brings tens of millions of people to major news websites each month and advertisers are given access to all these people for a fee. It’s second only to telepathic advertising or placing computer chips in people’s brains. Rusbridger is not yet ready to declare that advertising revenue didn’t work for the newspaper industry. He thinks that making people pay for news will reduce the number of readers and therefore advertising revenue.
If you think about journalism, not business models, you can become rather excited about the future. If you only think about business models you can scare yourself into total paralysis.
When Rusbridger said this he was being more idealistic. He thinks by putting content behind a wall which people must pay to access, a “paywall”, news publishers are sending the wrong message to the Universe. Paywalls may make good business sense, but they don’t make good editorial sense in a world where information exists on an unrestricted global network. A newspaper that puts its content behind a paywall is turning its back on the Zeitgeist.
But does journalism even exist anymore? Is there even such an industry? No, at least not in the same way that many of us still think about journalism. Whereas the journalist once carried the same authority as a doctor or an artist, post-modern communication allows anyone to make things that look like journalism and make them available to millions of people. Rusbridger calls this the “authority vs. involvement” dispute.
But even Rusbridger admits that if a paywall works, The Guardian can’t resist it forever.
Swipe right to make the connections that could change your career.
Swipe right. Match. Meet over coffee or set up a call.
No, we aren't talking about Tinder. Introducing Shapr, a free app that helps people with synergistic professional goals and skill sets easily meet and collaborate.
In his final years, Martin Luther King, Jr. become increasingly focused on the problem of poverty in America.
- Despite being widely known for his leadership role in the American civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr. also played a central role in organizing the Poor People's Campaign of 1968.
- The campaign was one of the first to demand a guaranteed income for all poor families in America.
- Today, the idea of a universal basic income is increasingly popular, and King's arguments in support of the policy still make a good case some 50 years later.
10 of the most sandbagging, red-herring, and effective logical fallacies.
- Many an otherwise-worthwhile argument has been derailed by logical fallacies.
- Sometimes these fallacies are deliberate tricks, and sometimes just bad reasoning.
- Avoiding these traps makes disgreeing so much better.
For Damien Echols, tattoos are part of his existential armor.
- In prison Damien Echols was known by his number SK931, not his name, and had his hair sheared off. Stripped of his identity, the only thing he had left was his skin.
- This is why he began tattooing things that are meaningful to him — to carry a "suit of armor" made up the images of the people and objects that have significance to him, from his friends to talismans.
- Echols believes that all places are imbued with divinity: "If you interact with New York City as if there's an intelligence behind... then it will behave towards you the same way."
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.