On the day after the NYT won five Pulitzer Prizes, Reuters reported that the company suffered a first quarter loss “of $74.5 million, or 52 cents a share, compared with a loss of $335,000, or nil cents a share, in the quarter a year ago.” Bill Keller claimed that Pulitzer Prizes showed why the NYT was an indispensable institution, citing its ability to hire lawyers to break a story. But if so, why is it losing its shirt?
Executive Editor Bill Keller of The New York Times said today’s Times sweep of five Pulitzer Prizes shows why his and all newspapers are still relevant — and should not be written off so quickly in the growing Web world.
“It comes in a year when a lot of newspapers are on the ropes, it is a reminder of what newspapers can do that others can’t,” Keller said just hours after the Pulitzer winners were announced. “Taking more than a year on a deep investigation, it helps to have lawyers who can file FOIAs and go to court when you need to.”
That year-long investigation was a reference to the David Barstow Investigative Pulitzer win for his work on the way retired generals were being used by the Pentagon to spread positive views on Iraq. The other Times’ winners came in Breaking News, for the Eliot Spitzer scandal; International reporting for coverage of Afghanistan and Pakistan; Criticism for art critic Holland Carter; and Feature Photography for Damon Winter’s photos of Barack Obama on the campaign.
The quality reflected by the Prizes failed to pay dividends in ad revenues which declined severely last quarter and look to decline again. The Reuters article said that “ad revenue fell 27 percent. At its news media group, which includes its daily papers, it fell 28 percent. The second quarter’s ad declines, Times Co Chief Executive Janet Robinson said in a statement, so far looks similar to the first.” The indispensible NYT is being dispensed with by the market.
If Pulitzer Prizes are a reliable proxy for “quality” then why didn’t the Pultizer Prizes return business dividends? One possibility is that ad revenues and circulation are not functions of “quality” journalism as Bill Keller understands it. Simply because the Pulizer gauge went “up” didn’t mean the commercial metrics would follow suit. Most businesses recognize that the ‘customer is always right’; but journalism may be an exception. The NYT may have assumed that if they built it — according to their lights — then the circulation and ads would come. Because of an editorial policies favoring certain kinds of stories, they may also have been paying too much for product: goldplating stories of marginal interest to the general public. Keller cites David Barstows expensive investigation into the “way retired generals were being used by the Pentagon to spread positive views on Iraq” as an example of the NYT’s prowess. But it may have been a testament to their obsession; and the result was a news product that readers were neither interested in nor regarded as important, at least to a degree that generated a correspondingly increased readership.
Yet another problem with using Pulitzer Prizes as indicators of quality is that while they might reflect the craftsmanship of what the Times chose to cover, they don’t provide any measure of what the NYT has failed to report on. Just as Naseem Taleb coined the term antilibrary to represent all the books a person hasn’t read, it is possible to speak of anti-news as all the news the NYT saw as unfit to print. The anti-news may have been a far more important factor to the Gray Lady’s circulation than the Pulitzers Keller is so proud of.
From a news reader’s point of view the ideal news source would be one which would sensibly improve his ability to anticipate trends; that would help him increase his predictive power. Yet the primary function of many news outlets, on both sides of the political aisle, is often to make excuses for the past and as such, undermine their ability to provide information which can help the reader think clearly about what lies ahead. My guess is that a large part of the reason why the Times is failing is that for too long it has lived for itself. The readers existed to admire its handiwork. The Gray Lady has now adorned itself with five more Pulitzers, which can join the one earned by Walter Duranty. Whatever befall, the baubles will look good at the funeral.
wretchard
My guess is that a large part of the reason why the Times is failing is that for too long it has lived for itself
That can not be improved on. The Pulitzers are cited as a measure of quality but what do they really represent? A technical gloss to some extent, the residue of capital expended or “gold plating” and above all the approval of the Pulitzer Committee. But the Committee are just another face for the same self referential set that populate the Times’ editorial board. The Pulitzer is no longer an independent measure of journalistic excellence than the Nobel Prize is an independent measure of the recipient’s contribution to making the world a safer place.
Bankruptcy is too good for them.
What’s wrong with the Pentagon using retired generals to spread positive views about Iraq?
It appears that the Times’ Keller would like a corruptible metric, like a branded committee’s award (ex. Emmy, Oscar, Nobel, Pullitzer), to supplant the market’s objective metric when adjudicating the value of his paper’s own brand.
The “Arab Street,” Pullitzer Prizes, asserted “consensuses,” Unnamed Retired Generals, Annenberg Journalism Awards (ex. for Kathy Couric’s
“bravery” in her “interview” of Alaska’s Governor): if Keller’s profession operated within an intellectually honest, more “American” framework, then his New York Times wouldn’t need any of these crutches to round-out her day-to-day efforts at attracting the readership that garners growing ad-revenues…
…which, let’s face it, is all Keller’s touting of his industry’s “prizes” is anyway: call them paid, inside-the-circle, advertising for the NYT (I’ll bet the Pullitzers and the Sulzbergers enjoy a quiet quid pro quo) even…
And…instead, the NYT would be freed up to report the unadorned facts surrounding real controversies like tax policy, global trade, financial regulations, politics and social trends with the honesty that literate, free-thinkers require.
Until then…let them eat them choke on their saccharin “Pullitzer” bon-bons as the sharks circle. Bankruptcy sans bailout serves them right!
LOM,
Pardon my “liberation” of your opening statement but it’s so spot on it’s worth at minimum a second read.
My guess is that a large part of the reason why the Times is failing is that for too long it has lived for itself
That can not be improved on
In fact your entire piece is so similar to my thoughts I’ll just request to be associated with them…good job
wretchard ..another great observation.
Now most of you thought I might finish there ..but wait..there’s more!
Advocacy journalism has been with us since Colonial Times.
Most grog and ale houses served as postal drop off points and consequently a good deal of mail was purloined and published.
It was in fact one of the contributing factors that lead to the Alex Hamilton/Aaron Burr duel that ended Hamilton’s life.
As far as the Nobel and Pulitzer prizes go, well you might as well just go ahead and throw in the Order of Lenin medal too.
imho the problem with the NY Times is the same as the problem with Miss America contest. Perez Hilton disqualified the leading contestant Miss California because as a Christian– she came out in favor of heterosexual marriage.
But wait a minute. beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. its a profoundly interested thing. So what is a homosexual doing judging a heterosexual beauty contest–when homosexuals are profoundly disinterested. It is not appropriate for homosexuals to be judging a heterosexual beauty contest.
Yet this is what the NYTimes does to their readers every day.
wrethcard,
Shame on me. What I liberated was 95% your statement with an endorsement by LOM …
Still, statement and endorsement are hand in glove material.
Interesting bit of self-absorption, that “ability to hire lawyers” is a measure of a news organization’s strength or acumen. And for what end? To demonstrate that a professional group (retired generals) defended their previous employer’s policies. Hmmmm. Let me guess: there are many professions out there where retired members DON’T defend the interests of their previous employer. Ok, not MANY: a few? Maybe none? Who among us does not speak well of the organization we used to work for?
So the real news here is not that generals defended America’s policy in Iraq, it’s that the NYT disagreed with that policy. And for that you need lawyers? No wonder they’re going under. F
Blantant bias toward liberal causes? Constant, persistent, strident cheerleading for the Democrat party? Strong, almost passionate efforts to undermine the foreign policy of the previous administration?
Any of these things could explain the persistent drop-off in revenues.
Bill
http://willstuff.wordpress.com
Simply because the Pulizer gauge went “up” didn’t mean the commercial metrics would follow suit. Most businesses recognize that the ‘customer is always right’; but journalism may be an exception.
The Pulitzer guage went “up”, but this could shine much more light on the Board that awards the prizes than it does on the NYT. Where are the reader representatives on that august Board? Methinks said Board is much like the oh-so-knowlegeable cliques that municipalities maintain to select public “art” for their unfortunate citizens, who frequently goggle in disgust at the final selections, and retch at the sums passed to the ‘artists’.
Yet the primary function of many news outlets, on both sides of the political aisle, is often to make excuses for the past and as such, undermine its ability to provide information which can help the reader think clearly about what lies ahead.
Well, one primary function of the NYT and its journalistic acolyetes, beyond those shown above, is a single-minded push to shape the future. That orientation appears to guide not only the selection of stories to be printed (and how frequently and over what duration to print them, eg Abu Ghraib), but also the selection of the excluded antilibrary.
I believe this shape-the-future function is so important to the organization that mere financial success is secondary. One aspect of its ‘shaping’ success pays for itself, in the gratification of, and possible emoluments from, those who ascend to political and economic power through the heroic exertions of the NYT. Otherwise, why should the controlling family members see the value of their shares plummeting, yet take no apparent measures to prevent ultimate failure? Let us watch and see how the current regime treats the NYT, after its blatantly obvious work emplacing the regime.
Who are the judges of the ‘quality’ of news journalism?
Why do consumers flock elsewhere?
Journalism died a long time ago, the Board can slap one another with all the trophies they want, but they can not pay money to have their consumers to take a second look.
A new paint job on the Titanic?
The real story, which may indeed have been “Pulitzer-worthy” (though not for the NYT), was why the Pentagon found it necessary or desireable to have some of the good news out of the ME retailed by its retired generals.
The objection, as always from the MSM, is to anyone challenging it’s prerogative to control the content of the news message or agenda.
Good news was ruled “out of bounds” and that was that.
Let them pawn their Pulitzers for lunch money and or FOIA lawyers.
This link may be relevant: Boycott the NYT.
Since 1968, the main stream media in western society has been trying to “stick it to the man”
In pursuing their adolescent fantasy vengeance against the fathers, or teachers, or (insert unwelcome voice of reality and authority here), they have brainwashed two generations now, and loosened the seams that bind our society together.
Society is now unraveling. The people they’ve brainwashed are so jaded they don’t care to be informed, even with propaganda, they only wished to be entertained, and newspapers will never be more entertaining than Oprah and sitcom reruns.
The remnant, who still believe in the ideals of the enlightenment and classical values of liberty and western civilization learned long ago that the main stream media was almost entirely biased against them and their cherished beliefs. They largely stopped patronizing the MSM as soon as alternatives became available.
The papers sowed the wind, and they are reaping the whirlwind!
Good riddance to bad rubbish!
#8 F,
Agreed.
It is far from unusual for former employees and leaders of organizations to identify with those organizations even after retirement. With or without pay for doing so. I will give as an example one of the recipients and forwarders of my newsletter. He has been there since the beginning on 9/11. He is also a retired executive from General Motors. He took great exception to, and argued with, my position that given that the value of GM stock was less than ‘Bed, Bath, and Beyond’ the rational choices were either to encourage a buyout from another entity or bankruptcy; instead of becoming Government Motors at a cost to the taxpayer several multiples of the company’s worth. It ended up with him severing our connection. I understand, because he devoted most of his life to the company.
I admit that I did not read the story, well because it came from the New York Times [the "Official Paper of Treason"] and therefore would not pass a credibility screeen. Still, if these generals were paid, so long as the money did not come from the taxpayer, then they were doing what comes naturally. The Left in this country knows that it will never have to pay for media support, because they own the hearts and minds of the reporters, editors, and publishers.
I know I will raise a glass in celebration if the NYT goes bankrupt. The ‘if’ is based on the likelihood of it being bailed out by the Treasury for services rendered. If it falls, I will consider it a victory for liberty.
Subotai Bahadur
Newspapers are indispensable– as raw material for Yesterday’s News ™– a brand of cat litter with spin-off versions for ferrets and rabbits. The product’s website even has a page titled “Inside Scoop.”
http://www.yesterdaysnews.com/?D=1246917&T=4893889
The Sad, Sad Truth, The Dirty Lowdown…..
Poor old Bill Keller. He knows that the end, as in The End Times, is nigh. Check out this, I think optimistic, assessment of The Times’ financial situation by Henry Blodget over at Silicon Alley Insider’s The Business Insider. It’s not a pretty picture. In fact, the situation may well be much worse, as some have written, because, given the overall market collapse, and The Times’ dire straits, the lender who extended the initial $400 million revolving credit line (of which $180 million remains theoretically available) in a much palmier era for both The Times and the markets, may no longer wish to throw its money onto The Times’ bonfire of vanity. If that $180 million is no longer available to The Times, they will burn through all of their remaining cash by the end of this quarter, which will land them in bankruptcy in just a few months.
Thus we have The Keening Keller, by turns lamenting the sad fate of “quality journalism”, unappreciated by the despised, unsavory, untutored, and unappreciative masses of paying readers, and touting The Times’ haul of five, count ‘em, five Pulitzer Prizes, delivered with their curious latter day onanistic cast by The Club to The Club, kind of a fizzle and not meaning much of anything anymore.
But, no matter, Keller will continue to keen non-stop from now on. He and The Times will not go quiet into that goodnight. In fact there is a method and a reason for all the racket. A racket even. Pinch and his merry band don’t want to land in bankruptcy court — because Pinch et al will be tossed out on their collective derrières if they go that route. Heaven forfend!
They have another plan….. Under the Pinch regime, The Times has become a propaganda rag (think Pravda). As a disseminator of propaganda for the Obama crew, The Times should be supported by the government so that it can continue its educative work and quality journalism for the greater good…… You get the picture. When we come to it, there will be some pretty frou-frou and lots of lipstick decorating this pig, but be assured it will still oink. Citizens, grab your wallets, and hold on tight!
Take those Pulitzers to bankruptcy court and see what they’re worth, Pinch.
All this pomposity coming from a paper that created 3 days worth of lies in the McCain affair story.
I hope you bastards get the financial results you so richly deserve.
In the words of an “August Personage” who felt the need to damn America, “Those birds(chickens) are coming home to roost.” Being a fat, balding plumber with a serious addiction to fair play, I discern that the Universe is moving to correct a severe slant to the left in the only language that is clearly understood by all except the mentally challenged, i.e. in their pocketbooks. Does salvation come from Mexico? How long will Carlos Slim tolerate such foolishness? Now, gloating is feeding my inner child right now, and, really, once it’s clear that “objectivity” has been cast asunder, there ain’t much left.
As to the ability to hire lawyers, well, have they been paid yet? I’m just sayin’….Seriously folks, they are tryin’ to get their virtue back the morning after ridin’ the train with the drunk frat rats. Hey, once it’s on the net, well, no one believes them anymore. So, goin’ in the tank for the Mighty O has consequences, doesn’t it? Now he might bail them out, but then it’ll be official that the “Pravda” of the west is truly to “important” to fail. They’ve lain down with dogs, so the price of political opportunism and the shameless pandering after the Great One is failure where it really counts – AD REVENUE!!!! When such hypocrisy is made public, the money will flee, and I for one, believe that Slim will be the wooden stake that puts an end to the hopes of a lasr second miracle. So, when the liberal bitches whine and moan about protecting the “freedom of the press” and “investigative journalism”, well, what goes around comes back around, and who, really takes these folks seriously anymore? So, I’ll keep using their free info off the web, content that I’ve done my small part to bring them down. The funniest thing about this is that the Great One knows that the NYT can’t really help him much anymore, because, like a tired old whore after a hard night’s work, She doesn’t fool anyone. She’s a whore, plain and simple, but at least when she washes up, she’s cleaner. Oh, my, what’s to become of the NYT?
Ahhh c’mon now, without the Times I would miss the restaurant reviews and…. the restaurant reviews. And the unintentionally funny comments of the barking yentas that comment on the reviews: “My husband and I frequently dine at ALL the best restaurants in the city and….”
Odds of the NYT being “too important to fail” and a future recipient of government largesse: guaranteed.
PA Cat: Newspapers are indispensable
Agreed
I have a bird
I still mourn the passing of the NY Sun.
Correction! Amanda Gordon is blogging on the NY Sun web site. Out and About lives.
http://www.nysun.com/blogs/out-and-about/
Since 1968? Sticking it to “The Man”?
How does that explain Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize for reporting on the wonders of the Soviet Union, way back when? Who got stuck on that one? Why millions of faceless, forgotten human beings, that’s who. The ones who never got to read the Restaurant Reviews in the NY Times. Quaint.
Ignorance is strength.
The truth is a lie.
Pulitzers before swine.
Time marches on.
Wrichard writes:
“The Gray Lady has now adorned itself with five more Pulitzers, which can join the one earned by Walter Duranty.”
Ouch.
“From a news reader’s point of view the ideal news source would be one which would sensibly improve his ability to anticipate trends; that would help him increase his predictive power.”
Average investors and savers, for example, would very much appreciate some good financial analysis and honest assessment of what current political decisions are doing to the economy.
Armegeddon Rex @ 14.
Bravo!
Many ‘credential’ processes and organizations — Nobels, Pulitzers, Oscars, hell, even college degrees — have been largely corrupted and hew to a suspiciously omni-directional political agenda.
Now we have beauty contestants litmus-tested for their political views.
Control over the apparatus of credentialism carries the power to confer legitimacy — as in celebrating the ‘brave’, ‘transgressive’ movies which ‘explore’ (the same) ‘challenging’ politically-fashionable issues (sexism, racism, etc.).
In the case of Miss California, or Old Media’s uniform ridicule of Tea Parties or Sarah Palin, the control is used to gatekeep and/or delegitimize.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 04/21/2009 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Bill in NC (#11): great observation, building on Wretchard’s comments. As a retired USMC officer, I can confirm that the media will twist the content of interviews, etc. to fit a preconceived theme. Despite the efforts of Public Affairs Officers, it’s often necessary to bypass the MSM completely. It’s not surprising that retired general officers were brought into the frey.
The NYT’s “antilibrary” is vast. They have effectively excluded 50% of the electorate from their readership and are somehow surprised that the prizes they win within the media echo chamber don’t equate to financial success. It’s funny that people in the information gathering business have so much tunnel vision.
Even worse, journalists don’t understand how they’ve undermined their own credibility. Look at Susan Roesgen’s reaction last week during her Chicago tea party interview. She credited/blamed Fox News for the protests. Advocacy journalism is now openly acknowledged. Insults and adjectives have replaced factual reporting. Now reporters like Roesgen assert that a protest isn’t “family viewing” when the interviewees are actually more polite than the typical journalist.
8 years of snarky comments and flat-out hatred for Bush have produced a sea change in society. The MSM hasn’t figured it out yet, but they sowed the wind and will reap the whirlwind. This means job losses and a permanent, unreserved antagonism between the media and large portions of the population. If I were a reporter conducting any interview, I’d have running shoes on and would double-knot them.
A Very Nice add on for Firefox users abusers HERE
Sorry had to try it out.
h/t to Pablo at Protein Wisdom
As to Taleb, he has a similar opinion of recipients of the Nobel antiprizes in fantasy sciences (anti-sciences?) like sociology, literature, economics and peace as Wretchard has of the Pulitzers. They’re both right.
Yet another problem with using Pulitzer Prizes as indicators of quality is that while they might reflect the craftsmanship of what the Times chose to cover, they don’t provide any measure of what the NYT has failed to report on.
For example, the Times won a Pulitzer for coverage of Elliot Spitzer’s sexacapdes, but how much coverage has the Times had of his culpability for the AIG meltdown? He (and Blumenthal, who’s still at it, and Cuomo the Lesser is picking up where Spitzer left off) misused his position as State AG to bully folks on Wall Street, and helped usher in the crowd of scam artists that hatched a catastrophe by selling each other AAA rated junk bonds. The Times has nothing to say about that…
But the real issues have already been well noted by others in this thread. The Times is just one of many media organizations that overindulged in partisan advocacy while trying to claim an objective viewpoint. The Pulitzer has gone the same way. I wish there wasn’t so much cynicsm in the world today, but lordy there is ample cause for it.
And politics aside, advertising supported media is lousy business model. I’m astonished it lasted as long as it did.
There were once 17 newspapers in New York city, a hundred years ago. And now the king of the hill is dead. And also poised to take pulitzer with with it.
Catty Kourik won a pulitzer for her much edited hit “interview” with Sarah Palin. good riddence to [the reputation of] all three, nyt, pulitzer, cbs. now go and get a room.
JMH:
“And politics aside, advertising supported media is lousy business model. I’m astonished it lasted as long as it did.”
What are the alternatives? If the MSM was simply government funded then it would most likely degenerate into state run propaganda agencies. If the MSM were owned by oligarchs like George Soros then it would become a tool for private interest political and market manipulation (To some extent. we’re already in that situation). I’m attracted to the idea of a government owned media with a management appointed through a process similar that used for the US Supreme Court Justices, i.e. positions held for life after selection by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Of course, such a system could also be abused.
The MSM is a serious weak link in a our current political system. It was very disturbing to watch that process where the MSM pulled down George W. Bush through the propaganda method of constant repetition. One would like to think that Americans were sophisticated enough to be immune from Goebbels’ style propaganda methods but they are obviously not. I detest Noam Chomsky (he’s a traitor) but we really do have issues with manufactured consent.
Perez Hilton was a judge at the Miss America Contest because women (and gays) watch that show and women love gays. That’s why he’s there. Straight guys don’t watch the show, counterintuitively.
The problem with the NYT is that though their SWPL audience is wealthy and powerful, and dominates culture and politics, they are not a mass audience.
In a closely divided nation, WOMEN form the demographic bricks on the jewelers scale. What makes money in the most part is female-oriented books (Twilight junk, other vampire-werewolf fantasies, etc.), movies, and TV. Examples being American Idol, Desperate Housewives, Dancing With the Stars, Oprah, the View, Sex and the City, and so on.
All the female oriented stuff is inevitably uber-PC, extremely Liberal, hard core anti-Joe Sixpack, predictably, because that’s what their female audience is comprised of and what they demand. But it makes money.
A few male-oriented stuff like Talk Radio (almost exclusively male audience), Fox News, Sports Programming, and Action-Adventure movies make money. But by and large the very feminized, female-oriented Entertainment-Media complex can’t understand or be bothered with men. Disney is hiring some female Latina who is known as the “Kid Whisperer” and has a background in Market Research for girls TV shows to head up it’s development effort aimed at young boys, as the Disney Princess Empire is crumbling in a recession, where parents can’t afford $30 Hannah Montana CDs and whatnot.
Part of it is driven by consumer products advertisers who prefer women on the assumption that they are both more persuadable and that they make most household purchasing decisions (antiquated now that most women are single — think about it). But much of it as Wretchard suggests about the NYT which is a “bubble” mentality. Too many women and SWPL yuppies running things, and unable to visualize their readers and what they want.
Only the WSJ has done well as a print newspaper. And that because they focus on business news and ANALYSIS. Clearly Murdoch has ambitions to make the paper a National Paper. Even USA Today is in trouble, it’s circulation inflated by hotels buying copies for guests.
There is for example, no national newspaper oriented towards SPORTS, and a male readership, giving in-depth analysis of say the NFL, College Football, MLB and College Baseball, Basketball at all levels, UFC, etc. Despite the obvious market for it, the gap in the marketplace, and the stimulating presence of ESPN. Instead Sports is made into a PC dogma party, parroting the female-SWPL yuppie lines of the day.
There is no national newspaper oriented towards Entertainment and a female audience. Despite the hunger for that sort of thing and the various ET/E! and so on entertainment oriented tv shows and sites like TMZ and Dlisted and so on. Stuffy, self-important SWPL reject that because it’s not glamorous and “important” enough for them.
Print CAN succeed, the WSJ is evidence of that. But it has to deliver to customers and that takes management who can understand what people will pay for.
Maybe(?) the answer is a government funded system that provides a raw information feed with a neutral point of view, i.e. editorials, partisan positions, advertising, etc. would be strictly prohibited. Also set up citizen groups that act as referees to this government information feed. Include in the process a punishment regime that permanently banned editors and reporters who deliberately slanted raw information or excluded information for the sake of advancing a political agenda. The theory is that this raw information feed would provide the basis for public political discussions that could be carried out through completely different media, e.g. blogs on the Internet.
Evanston1
Semper Fi 1967-1970. Recruited by CIA 1970-1983
Father and brother in law also Devil Dog Aviators.
Dad 1941-1973, Bro-1960-1990
Habu
Eggplant:
Let us please keep the government out of the press as much as possible. If you want government run press, listen to NPR! Go watch PBS!
Re-read the U.S. Constitution, there is no government authority to intervene in the press. The first amendment in the Bill of Rights expressly prohibits government intervention in the press.
We appear to have a Marxist-Socialist snake seizing as much power as he can. Let’s not place another part of American society under his boot heel.
In a free society with a market economy, the people decide if something is valuable. They’ve decided the New York Times and similar “progressive” main stream media papers ARE NOT VALUABLE! Stand aside and let the market work.
God know, the last thing we need are more parasites drawing taxpayer funded paychecks for life!
I really think you’ve come up with a proposed solution worse than the problem this time.
New York Times loss widens; shares fall 16%
CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — New York Times Co. shares fell 16% Tuesday after the company reported a wider loss in the first quarter, hampered by another steep decline in advertising revenue, costs related to job cuts and a write-down of leases associated with a newsstand-distribution subsidiary that closed during the quarter.
http://tinyurl.com/cc8rbt
“If the MSM were owned by oligarchs…”
Such as NBC (and the cable offspring) owned by GE?
The word has come down on high from the Management of GE that the word is Green, and the news shall be Green, and no doubters or skeptics of Anthropogenic Global Warming shall pass the hallowed halls of the Peacock network.
Because GE is going to RAKE in making all sorts of wind turbines, and associated Green technologies, and nobody is going to mess with their cash flow stream.
Armeggedon Rex said:
“Let us please keep the government out of the press as much as possible. If you want government run press, listen to NPR! Go watch PBS!”
This is a valid counter example. NPR (a liberal propaganda machine) represents the very worst of the MSM. However the problem of oligarch control of the MSM is not addressed. People like George Soros have the resources to buy up the entire MSM and make it their personal mouth piece. There has already been talk that some oligarch will buy up the New York Times at the 11th hour and turn it into their private propaganda tool.
34. Eggplant:
“Maybe(?) the answer is a government funded system that provides a raw information feed with a neutral point of view, i.e. editorials, partisan positions, advertising, etc. would be strictly prohibited”
WTF are you drinking,shooting,snorting,smoking?
Rarely is the government the answer unless the question is;
What expands continuously until individual rights are extinguished?
Jefferson quotes: “When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”
The problem boils down to Signal-to-Noise ratio. The MSM has demonstrated that it can drown out any valid signal by pumping out enough noise through the propaganda method of constant repetition. The naive free market response doesn’t work because someone like George Soros could buy enough MSM entities like the New York Times and CNN to pursue their agenda. The problem of oligarch control of the MSM really is a weak link in our democracy.
Eggplant 41:
This here interweb thingy seems to be breaking above the noise floor.
Some folks accustomed to setting the agenda seem to be fairly upset about it.
If folks like Soros or Senior Slim want to flush money down a rat hole, let ‘em.
Many Americans and western Europeans are becoming distrustful of the MSM. They feel they’re being fed propaganda in their bones!
Most of the rest of the world has never trusted it!
The failure of the Rocky Mountain Snooze and Seattle Puke Intelligencer and all the others is the first major slip of the tyrant’s hands on the leash.
If the government intervenes to bail out the MSM they will have even less credence than now. If Uncle Bama doesn’t come riding to the rescue on a shiny unicorn, they’ll go bankrupt before the next election.
I need some butter for my popcorn, quick!
What are the alternatives?
I dunno. Got me there. I guess there’s no way to pay for anything other than government funding or advertising.
Armeggedon Rex said:
“This here interweb thingy seems to be breaking above the noise floor. Some folks accustomed to setting the agenda seem to be fairly upset about it. If folks like Soros or Senior Slim want to flush money down a rat hole, let ‘em. Many Americans and western Europeans are becoming distrustful of the MSM. They feel they’re being fed propaganda in their bones!”
I’m convinced it was the Internet that kept the MSM from leading us to defeat in Iraq. It’s obvious that the leftist members of the MSM wanted us to fail in Iraq and played many of the same tricks that they played during the Vietnam War. Unfortunately for people like Dan Rather, the Internet caught them out and defeated their agenda.
Unfortunately there still stands the problem of acquiring raw information. The Internet is an ineffective tool for acquiring raw information (spend a few minutes reviewing the accuracy of Wikipedia if you have any doubts). Over all, the quality of information on the Internet is slightly better than public restroom graffiti.
There needs to be a raw information feed from a trusted source. The problem of acquiring trusted raw information is how people like George Soros can defeat the Internet.
Eggplant, #44: There needs to be a raw information feed from a trusted source. The problem of acquiring trusted raw information is how people like George Soros can defeat the Internet.
There is no such thing as an unbiased news source, and never has been. By definition, this means there’s also no such thing as a news source that will be anywhere close to universally trusted. The only reason the MSM have been able to pass themselves off as objective for as long as they have is because they all happened to share the same bias. It took the emergence of a strong counterweight (Fox News) to explode the myth of media objectivity once and for all.
Eggplant 44:
I believe you have one possible solution before you. That’s what pajamasmedia is all about. You pay for news and entertainment you appreciate. If there is a market for accurate news, pajamasmedia or some other entity will spring up to fill the void. It’s called capitalism. If the MSM were offering a product the people were interested in buying, at a price that was attractive, they wouldn’t be on the verge of bankruptcy now.
The genie is out of the bottle for the press. Independent journalists through automated media are taking over. Blogs call out people like Dan Rather because they know something is amiss and they ferret that thing out. I think of the blogosphere as the early publishers of pamphlets. Take the time, do the research and publish the unvarnished truth. Not a corporation that sues people but a voice of truth that can be verified. The best part is also the trickiest- That is how to make a career in independent journalism. I read Michael Yon and I have donated funds to keep him going. People usually decide these things with their dollars but people tend to take the internet for granted. They pay for access but want content for free. Subscription fees? If reasonable, that might work. But there will always be those who do it because they value the truth. I just hope we can keep those people alive.
Here’s one government secret not leaked by the NYT…
http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2659
If you went to a Tea Party on the 15th…Big Brother was watching you.
And no, I’m not surprised…not in the least.
Let ‘em. These things need to be addressed in the full light of day. Exercising our Constitutional rights is nothing to shy away from. And they are right to fear us as long as they take us for granted. I’ve always wanted to be a part of American history. Bring it on.
The color of journalism has always been yellow. Even since and perhaps including Thomas Payne. The problem with the modern equivalant of the press is the lack of a competing voice in a similar medium.
Harper’s Magazine and TH Nast sprung up and rose in popularity, so to counter the lies spread by Greeley, and Co, and the lies of Tammany Hall. In most cities there were usually at least two newspapers to pander to polar oppositions. Since TV came on scene most two paper towns became uni-tabloid, with an Op ed piece taking the place of competing editorial and commentary. But the news stayed polarized.
I surmise with the rise of talk radio the, death of printed news was all but certain, and since the growth of the World Wide Web the still uncertain replacement is certain to be more immediate more critical and more available to market niches than the ponderous impersonal and pandering newprint press.
Cub Scouts will miss the end rolls and bird lovers everywhere will miss the convenient size. However, even sushi lovers have found a better means of conveying fish from market.
A Pulitzer Prize for spending a million bucks and filing foias to find out that retired generals support the wars they fought and their comrades in arms. Whodathunkit???
Maybe they are going broke chasing stories nobody but Code Pink or a raving lunatic would care about. Gee lets fly a bunch of reporters to Bear Scrotum Falls, AK to find out if the library is banning any books.
Breaking news here. Not only do retired generals support wars but retired NYT reporters still don’t believe I F Stone was a traitor and a spy. What else is news? Paris Hilton ain’t a virgin?
PS – The NYT should have gotten a Pulitzer for this except that they have totally forgotten they wrote it.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
New York Times might want to consider whether or not a Prize from Publishers Clearing House is something a little more important to their fiscal future than what pulitzer has to offer: the first is a long shot, and the other a sure thing.
In my town, everything but everything was done to save The Times Herald (a Liberal Paper). It folded in ’78 or so, and the victorious Morning News is now the most partisan politically correct democrat talking points news screed. The seven headed Hydra is the one who remains in news rooms regardless, using the medium of choice ’til now, the newspaper.
TRUST AND THE LACK THEREOF.
Jim
This is really simple folks.
They lost their cred.
How?
They deceived their customers. Oh, the NYT Journalists that walked away with awards truly believed their written pap. They had been deceived long ago.
It doesn’t matter how much lipstick you put on a pig!
Academy Awards
CMA’s
Tony’s
Emmy’s
Nobel Prizes
Pulitzers
These groups develop, over time, their own unique little islands of consensus: After which, if you don’t fit the template, you just don’t belong.
I wish they would just stop fawning all over themselves.
Gaffe Prices: Ah, a Dallasite. I especially liked it when the Soviet Space exhibit was in Dallas and the Times Herald was a major sponsor. By the time I saw it both the Times Herald and the USSR were history.
I left Dallas, though. Tired of the politics of race.
How was the Dallas Tea Party?
Habu,
If you have not seen it, ya gotta love Operation Red Flag.
http://www.veoh.com/browse/movies/category/movies_documentary_and_biography#watch%3Dv14406491fJgGgdYn
Thanks
What’s really amazing is how they won’t shake their ideological shackles, even in the face of their own demise.
Just a for instance. You think the NY Times just might jack up its sales if they started to “flood the zone” — to use their term – with stories about, oh, Obama’s still-never-proven citizen status? Or “Obama: the lost Columbia years”? Or detailed stories of Democratic senatorial corruption? Where are the “deep investigations” on all this? Where are the teams of lawyers demanding documents?
** crickets **
Sure, Dems and Pubs both have their corrupt elements, but the Dems are way more corrupt for a simple reason. They have learned over the decades that they can get away with it, and Republicans can’t. Even the whiff of scandal ends a Republican’s career. Repubs get caught, and they resign. Dems get caught and they get re-elected (I’m talking to you, Barney).
Yet even with all these fat, slow moving targets to hunt, the press points always in the same direction, always sees only one enemy.
Not to mention the stories they could be doing on jihadist mosques, on “life along the border,” on Chinese espionage, on the farce of global warming. One blockbuster after another is just waiting out there for them to grab the ball and run, and they won’t do it. Ideology trumps survival.
#57, yeah I miss the old Herald, twas better than the belo imposter, the morning snooze, when snooze became all hep cat.
the only real competition morning snooze has is from the observer, and the observer’s add revenue is all from a proliferation of sex ads. The observer has this fixation that morning news is the closest thing to the storm front newsletter that has ever bean.
the Soviet Space exhibit sure was depressing. I thought for sure they were hoping someone would offer to buy the junk, and take it off their hands. I remember the footage of the largest launch pad explosion in history. And soviet space capsules bouncing off the head of borat in kazakstan.
I’ll bet the folks at NYT were even sadder, when they fell apart, but check out Habu’s comment #80 on belmont Modern Times post; you have to scroll down to bottom of page, then select <<previous entries- to find it, the Modern Times wretchard post. It tells of a Paul Harvey (RIP) [style] “The Rest of The Story” tale of what happened with the fall of soviet union that is very much plausible, to us with less direct knowledge of internal spy warfare.
sorry, that’s the getting to zero post.
As others have pointed out the “Pulitzer Prizes” is a nickel-plated eggcup of the so-called intellectual elite. In fact, it’s probably a negative to a modern up and coming news organization.
The real test for the NTY Corporation is in the market place. The NYT is failing that test and probably should go into Chapter 7 BK Liquidation. At least some of bond holders and a few of the the shareholders will get a small fraction of their money back in a BK (the building, plant facilities, communication equipment and so on will bring in some money).
Blaming the demise of entities like the NYT on changing technology (internet etc.) isn’t accurate. Much like the asteroid that hit the earth at the end of the Cretaceous and wiped out the dinosaurs, technology was only the final blow to what was already inevitable.
I suspect that despite attacks on the free market that have been going on for seventy-odd years, enough of it remained that market forces simply moved people away from the NYT, NBC, NPR/PBS, etc. People figured out that what was advertised was impartial reporting of news events but what was actually being sold was leftist propaganda outlets. So the customer voted with their feet and their dollars.
These Pulitzers are the equivalent of an organization consisting of judges who are former employees of Circuit City and Boater’s World handing cheap trophies for being the best salesmen around to employees sitting around mostly empty stores, while customers are buying all their electronics from Best Buy and and topside paint from West Marine.
I subscribe to the LA Times, but only because there’s just no substitue for newspaper to put underneath the cats’ litter boxes. I’m wondering what I’m going to be able to use as a substitute.
“Blaming the demise of entities like the NYT on changing technology (internet etc.) isn’t accurate.”
But what you think is inevitable is only so if there is an alternative for the market to choose. In this argument, that would be newer and popular technology. The dinosaurs had no choice re: asteroids, neither did those rocks have a choice.
What is happening to music radio, top twenty or even top one hundred is similar. There is more for less in other similar media, and it is more interactive with the end user.
#64 If your cats are young and spry, take a look at this:
http://www.amazon.com/Clevercat-Top-Entry-Litter-Box/dp/B0002ZS20I
Get an 18gal tote at the Lowe’s Depot, cut a 9″-diameter hole toward one end of the lid for better strength, apply some leftover weatherstripping and voila. Cats have privacy, dog’s baser tastes are frustrated (why I did it), the LA Times loses another subscriber.
Gaffe Prices @ 60, 61: I saw that post from Habu, and went back to read it again. There are a lot of smart commenters here at Belmont Club who bring a wealth of experience to the table. I was never in the military (the spirit was willing but the flesh is woefully weak) yet am not so stupid as to scorn the opinions of those whose actions and will let me sleep peacefully. I read BC to find the opinions of those who live in the real world. Of those I think Habu is the one who most consistently inspires my inner “You say WHAT?” not to say OMG or even the occasional WTF. You can be a scary dude, Habu. Thank you for your service.
O.B. @ 66: Huh, look at that! I never cease to be astounded at what I learn at the Belmont Club. It would cut down on the mess, a laudable goal. One of three cats, though, doesn’t qualify in the least as young and spry, and one of the young ones is as clumsy as a cat ever gets. I don’t have a dog, though I’d love to have one; but I’m not a good enough pack to justify a dog. (Work would frown on bringing my dog with me, and dogs left alone tend to eat things. Like furniture.) As for the LA Times subscription, it will last only long enough to accumulate a backlog of cat litter collectors. Then I’ll dump them again, and cross the cat litter box bridge when I return to it. I can’t even stand to read the Times’ comics anymore – even the “funnies” are just an extension of the editorial pages. It’s like a cartoon version of the U.N. (Is that redundant?) Box scores are better read on ESPN.com, and the front page makes me want to barf. So all in all, cat litter aside, the Times is a worthless rag and I won’t be playing “Nearer My God to Thee” when they go down like the Titanic.
Wade, the market does not need to provide alternatives for a nonessential product. In the hierarchy of needs, humans do not actually NEED mass produced news. Many people, despairing of the move of the MSM from news producers to propaganda outlets, have simply opted out of the information stream altogether, not changed to the internet. Those who care enough (like most people posting here, I would guess) have moved to internet/talk radio, which I will grant is a market alternative, but they didn’t absolutely NEED to do so, they could have simply tuned out entirely.
My reference to the dinosaurs was based upon what is now pretty clear fossil evidence that for as much as a million years before the KT asteroid, the dinosaurs were in a very steep decline which would certainly have resulted in an extinction event even without the asteroid. There is conjecture about what caused this – diseases of various types but particularly prions and viruses seem to be the current CW – but the fossils show this no matter the cause.
Neither the rock nor the dinosaurs had a choice, it’s true, but the dinosaurs were going extinct regardless of the rock. In the same way, the MSM would still be declining today if the internet had never happened. The rock was the coup de grace for the already dying dinosaurs; the internet and changing techology was the coup de grace for an already dying MSM. That’s the analogy I was trying to make.
#57: the tea party here was great, I’ve seen some of it again on u-tube, great organisation of speakers, the cops were glad to be there. No trash, no nudity, no public making out, no puppet heads, etc, as at a leftist freak show jubilee.
I went across the street to the Public library to use the mens room, only to walk in on a drug sale transaction, not going on in the stall, but right in front of the hand washing sink.
Un- or little fazed, they completed their drug/money sale transaction and left. how depressing.
WDMFF@71: (And again, I thank Richard for his patience) What you need, my friend, is a ramp, perhaps rubbed with catnip, for elder kitty. If the ramp is between the box and a wall, there aren’t many directions for clumsy kitty to fall. If you have regular hours, a dog can do quite well in a crate as long as you give it some serious play time every day. I used to pay my neighbor child a quarter to walk my dog after school (poop bags supplied)in addition to our playtime in the evening. I found she did best with a chew toy filled with yummy, low-cal stuff that I make (and sell) myself and froze solid in the bone. Forget the crap at the pet store, it’s nasty. I have an advantage in that I obtained her through friends at age seven and knew beforehand that she is both calm and cat-friendly. The cats will do for a pack, she supposes, but she prefers me, it is true. She also gets regular visits with her friends the rambunctious dogs living with her “auntie.” That’s where she gets groomed at least twice a month.
Cartoon version of the UN – now, that’s comedy!
Gaffe Prices @ 73: Yeah, one more reason I moved out of Dallas County. Twenty years ago the advice was to avoid the bathrooms on the first two floors. I wonder how much further up the rot has spread? I believe it was Robert Heinlein who wrote that the health of a society could be measured by the cleanliness of its public restrooms.
Another wizard title, wretchard –the Chaplin movie being a romance with the left’s romantic image (by the compleat entrepreneur Chaplin, natch). The NYT is trying the same approach, only the contradiction isn’t (as with Chaplin) between the personal and the political, but between the self-image and the bottom-line.
Goverment bailout plan for NYT (and others): let them all apply for work at NPR.
Democratic Party (donkey) bailout plan: give every reporter a book deal (quick cash).