How about some realistic expectations, more experimentation, and less punditry about punditry?

Fred Clark offers up his theory as to why things are as dire as they are for the newspaper industry – that the expectation for profit margins has been grown to something unrealistic these past twenty years: Why oh why can’t we have a better press corps?:

So why oh why don’t we have a better press corps?

Part of the answer to that question is that our newspapers are being asked to do something they were never designed to do and something they are fundamentally and structurally incapable of doing: they’re being asked to provide shareholders with double-digit and ever-increasing profit margins.

This is a ridiculous expectation. If you are an investor looking for a 15- or 20-percent return on your investment and you’ve purchased newspaper stock, then you’re a bad investor. You are, in fact, a stupid and a silly investor. You have invested in the wrong thing for the wrong reasons and you are expecting the wrong results. You are expecting impossible results.

Newspapers have a solid and reliable, but modest, business model. Owning a newspaper — even now, even with competition from cable news and the Internet, and even with Craigslist all but eliminating the classified ad market — is like owning a license to print money. But only a modest amount of money. Buying newspaper stock is thus much like investing in CDs. It’s safe, but humble.

Remember the Savings & Loan debacle of the 1980s? That’s what’s happening right now with newspapers.

Amy Webb is wondering why so many are arguing about arguments instead of focusing on what really counts (I am guilty as charged unfortunately) : Reshaping the Conversation:

Raise your hands: Who’s got an hour today to learn about the geospatial web? What about reality mining using cellular data? What about semantic tagging? 2d barcodes? Mobile frameworks using advanced SMS?

That’s what I thought.

Here’s the real problem facing our newsrooms. Most people are out there playing checkers while companies like Google and Adobe are playing chess. NOTHING WILL CHANGE in journalism unless the conversation is refocused on what matters most: How can the ever-hastening disruptive change be either met or overcome by adapting technology and creative business models?

You don’t need to knock a man down to argue his ideas

No one is above criticism, but the knock Jeff Jarvis took from Slate from Ron Rosenbaum missed the mark badly. It attempted to paint Jarvis as just another new media guru in pursuit of a buck it at the expense of others. Jarvis responded here. Many of Jeff Jarvis’s ideas are very much up for debate – I don’t think journalists are anywhere near as responsible over what’s happening as much as he does (shortsighted publishers, corporations, management, business and technology changes are *far* more to blame (read “The Innovator’s Dilema” – NOW)) and his tone can be brutal in the face of so much pain (so many jobs lost, so many families thrown into upheaval), but he’s willing to debate his ideas and seek out those of others. The author went personal and attempted to de-legitimize ongoing efforts that Jarvis has been leading that are important to journalism, like the recent conference on the future of news at CUNY or hosting so much relevant conversation on his blog. It’s a shame because argument is needed to address where we were, where we are going, what the consequences are. Blunt, honest talk. The Slate piece was a distraction from that.

Related:

Steve Outing: Do newspapers have 6 more months?

Nick Denton: A 2009 Internet Media Plan

Wired: Poll: Internet, Fox News Are Most Trusted News Sources

Silicon Alley Insider: Record Traffic Not Saving Financial News Sites

Metafilter: Can nonprofit news models save journalism?

norgs – the unconference

the norgs must read list

Jeff Jarvis: Saving Journalism (and killing the press)

And, because this vid is so fit for the Daily Show, I just have to share it (vegetarians – do NOT click this):

Technology and business model shifts can drive innovation

David Cohn, contributor at Columbia Journalism Review, Seed Magazine and Wired has been exploring the future of journalism for a long time now, notably on his blog, at NewAssignment.net and NewsTrust.net.

His latest effort, funded by the Knight News Challenge, is Spot.us – a service founded on the principal that journalism is a process and not a product.

It’s an interesting effort. It joins other non-profit journalism resources such as NPR and ProPublica in working to solve the funding question that has been consuming those who want to see journalism flourish as business models and technologies shift. In this particular solution – it is YOU who determines what stories you fund directly.

Commentary by Dan Gillmor: Spot.us Launches

Commentary by Beth Kanter: Spot.Us: Community Funded Reporting

By Digidave himself on his blog: Launching The Spot.Us Ship: Community Funded Reporting

And introducing the service at vimeo: Spot.Us – Community Funded Reporting Intro:
Spot.Us – Community Funded Reporting Intro from Digidave on Vimeo.

And yes, this is me riffing off of a great conversation that was held by Aaron and Arpit at BarCampPhilly.

So, what is ‘truth’ anyway? Ben Kenobi and Sarah Palin Share The Stage

What’s your reaction to Sarah Palin’s performance in her interview with Dave Gibson last night? If you were a conservative, it most likely was positive. If you were liberal, most likely negative.

How can I confirm such a crazy statement? How can there be two opposing opinions of the same event? Two different takes on the ‘truth’ of it?

Go to memeorandum and follow the discussion on blogs that match your political view point and follow the discussion on blogs that don’t.

Or switch between CNN and Fox News if you want a massively bad head ache.

Witness reality torn asunder.

Back in 1997 Dave Winer wrote a piece about programming that helped solidify how I felt about my career choice – he summed it up as a pursuit of truth: Programmers:

Programmers have a very precise understanding of truth. You can’t lie to a compiler. Try it sometime. Garbage in, garbage out. Booleans, the ones and zeros, trues and falses, make up the world programmers live in. That’s all there is! I think programming is deep, it teaches us about the non-cyber universe we live in. There’s something spiritual about computers, and I want to understand it.

…When a programmer catches fire it’s because he or she groks the system, its underlying truth has been revealed. I’ve seen this happen many times, a programmer languishes for months, chipping at the edges of a problem. Then all of a sudden, a breakthrough happens, the pieces start fitting together. A few months later the software works, and you go forward.

When I look at memorandum each day and click away from the warm confines of blogs that share my political view, I am confronted with the the fact that truth is greatly determined by our point of view.

Thank you Obi-wan Kenobi, you bastard.

John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as Vice President is both interpreted as a disaster by liberals and as an inspired move by conservatives.

But one thing is for sure, the move has dominated our attention and driven us a way from weightier topics like the economy and moves taking place across the world, with light weight controversies and indignities (kinda like Britney Spears news does every once and a while).

On this point, two folks I read daily for their points of view (usually opposing), greatly agree:

Doc Searls: Framing wins:

I don’t know if the McCain campaign actually intended for this to happen, but the way it looks to me right now, it’ll work. Palin is single-handedly turning Barack Obama into John Kerry: a policy wonk quarantined to the bottom end of the FM dial. It’s amazing to watch.

Groundhog Day: Competing Messages: Attention Deficit Nation:

…as I watched the media coverage around the announcement, and that of the self-important, self-aggrandizing “blogosphere,” it became clear, to me anyway, just what this was about.

While this is at least partially about winning attention for McCain’s candidacy, some of it even negative attention, it is mostly about taking attention away from Obama’s campaign. And, in that regard, it’s been a brilliant tactical move. Whether it will be enough to swing the election his way remains to be seen.

Obama at the bottom of the FM dial. And so moved are the policies and important events of the world taking place, while we are dazzled and spun every which way.

Jay Rosen outlined the strategy, in a piece posted on September 3rd, that was prescient: The Palin Convention and the Culture War Option:

John McCain’s convention gambit is a culture war strategy. It depends for its execution on conflict with journalists, and with bloggers (the “angry left,” Bush called them) along with confusion between and among the press, the blogosphere, and the Democratic party. It revives cultural memory: the resentment narrative after Chicago ’68 but with the angry left more distributed. It dispenses with issues and seeks a trial of personalities. It bets big time on backlash.

At the center of the strategy is the flashpoint candidacy of Sarah Palin, a charismatic figure around whom the war can be fought to scale, as it were.

It’s not like much of the press isn’t reporting on the lies and mischaracterizations spewing from McCain/Palin. Witness WashingtonPost.com on the 9th: As Campaign Heats Up, Untruths Can Become Facts Before They’re Undone:

From the moment Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin declared that she had opposed the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” critics, the news media and nonpartisan fact checkers have called it a fabrication or, at best, a half-truth. But yesterday in Lebanon, Ohio, and again in Lancaster, Pa., she crossed that bridge again.

Wired.com on the 10th: FactCheck.org Finds That McCain’s ‘Facts’ Don’t Check Out

Fact is the media, mass and independent, are being played like marionettes in a game to control your attention and keep Obama, policies, or real impacting events like the economy, from the public discourse.

Glenn Greenwald at Salon did a good job of tracking one of the latest false controversies – the ‘lipstick on a pig’ quote that was taken out of context. He mistakenly attributes the mass media as being the first on the story when Memeorandum was spreading the meme a day before it broke across the country: New heights of stupidity:

It isn’t surprising that the McCain campaign wants this sort of tawdry, Freak Show/Reality Show vapidity to determine the outcome of the election. If you were them, wouldn’t you want that, too? And though it’s not news that establishment media outlets are so easily and happily manipulated by these tactics, tactics which enable them to cover “stories” which their empty-headed reporters can easily comprehend, it is still striking to watch the now-decades-old process unfold and observe how absolutely nothing has changed.

It makes you wonder if ‘truth’ really matters anymore. Marc Fisher at Washington Post goes so far as to wonder if the Boomer ingrained distrust of authority has morphed into something far more ominous: For Working Moms, ‘Flawed’ Palin Is the Perfect Choice:

In this hyperdemocratized society, the national conviction that anyone can succeed is morphing into a belief that experience and knowledge may almost be disqualifying credentials.

Like many at the rally, Victoria Robinson-Worst sees Palin’s lack of experience as an asset. “I know people who have experience who are totally incompetent,” said Robinson-Worst, who lives in Loudoun County, designs wedding flowers and raises two children. “And I know people who have no experience who step in and get it right. I mean, women can do amazing things.”

This is where culture wars, identity politics and self-suffocating academic theories of deconstructionism have led us: Authority is suspect. Experience is corrupting. Ignorance is strength?

Next will be “war is peace.” Or have we already heard that one?

Shades of Nick Carr there huh?

Boing Boing posted about a book that might be the most important must-read of the year (I’m buying this today): True Enough: the science, history and economics of self-deception:

Manjoo makes a good case. He walks through a number of net-based conspiracy theories on both sides of the political spectrum, speaks with their adherents, the experts who claim it’s all bogus, and then to cognitive scientists and other scientists who explain the gigantic gap between what is so obvious to non-partisans and what is blindingly, passionately important to the adherents.

Grounded in history and science, True Enough paints a dismal picture of a species with a limitless capacity for self-deception and selective reasoning. But Manjoo doesn’t ascribe the rise of truthiness to fragmented media alone: he calls out PR firms, media outlets and others who have profited from the erosion of the truth.

Here’s a link: Amazon.com: True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society (Hardcover)

So what to do?

As a programmer with a drive to find and share ‘truth’ I have no idea whatsoever. To me, 2+2 will always equal 4. Trusting a sound bite is like criticizing a system’s infrastructure without recognizing the context it was built in. I don’t give a damn what a politician says on the matter. We should all be looking for the big balls of mud that provide us with truth.

But slacktivist has an idea (which I don’t agree with) and that is to fight fire with fire – witness his latest post – John McCain, Friend of NAMBLA.

And a reminder – beware the October surprise: NYTimes.com: Bush Said to Give Orders Allowing Raids in Pakistan. It’s about time we close the deal, but why did it take seven years?

Social Media/Software Links for Today

NYTimes: Brave New World of Digital Intimacy: About social networks and software and how we are using them to connect with one another.

Mind Hacks: The distant sound of well-armed sociologists – Reflections on the above mentioned NYTimes story.

wordle.net – generates graphical ‘word clouds’ from the text provided.

Reflections of a Newsosaur: Newspaper sales fall record $3B in 6 mos.

NPR.org: An Uneasy America: ‘Why We Hate Us’:

The Reality Club: A coversation On “Is Google Making Us Stoopid”.

J-School: Philly.com’s Convention Coverage and the Ethic of the Link

J-School: The Future of Journalism

Annenberg’s FactCheck.org: is doing a great job fact checking our candidates. Anyone listening?

SciAm.com: The Political Brain – Brain-imaging study shows political predilections are a product of unconscious confirmation bias. How we see reality is biased towards our own currently held beliefs.

NYTimes on Jon Stewart

NYTimes: Is Jon Stewart the Most Trusted Man in America?:

Most important, at a time when Fox, MSNBC and CNN routinely mix news and entertainment, larding their 24-hour schedules with bloviation fests and marathon coverage of sexual predators and dead celebrities, it’s been “The Daily Show” that has tenaciously tracked big, “super depressing” issues like the cherry-picking of prewar intelligence, the politicization of the Department of Justice and the efforts of the Bush White House to augment its executive power.

For that matter, the Comedy Central program — which is not above using silly sight gags and sophomoric sex jokes to get a laugh — has earned a devoted following that regards the broadcast as both the smartest, funniest show on television and a provocative and substantive source of news. “The Daily Show” resonates not only because it is wickedly funny but also because its keen sense of the absurd is perfectly attuned to an era in which cognitive dissonance has become a national epidemic. Indeed, Mr. Stewart’s frequent exclamation “Are you insane?!” seems a fitting refrain for a post-M*A*S*H, post-“Catch-22” reality, where the surreal and outrageous have become commonplace — an era kicked off by the wacko 2000 election standoff in Florida, rocked by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 and haunted by the fallout of a costly war waged on the premise of weapons of mass destruction that did not exist.

Our Response to Paris Hilton’s Response to McCain Shows Our Biases

Paris Hilton responded, via a video of her own, to John McCain’s Celebrity advertisement.

How you see her video is completely based upon your pre-existing bias.

Want proof?

If you are liberal you see it as an endorsement of Obama’s plan and as a smack down on McCain:

Open Left: Why Obama’s Drilling Compromise Makes Some Sense

Talk Left: Paris Hilton Strikes Back

reddit: Paris Hilton Responds to the McCain Ad = McCain gets served.

If you are conservative, you see it as an endorsement of McCain’s plan and as a smack down on Obama:

Althouse: Paris Hilton does a pro-McCain ad!

Hot Air: New third-party ad: Obama no longer the biggest celebrity in the race; Update: Her plan’s better than Obama’s, says McCain camp

Either Paris Hilton is a genius, or we are so wrapped up in our own points of view that we look for ANYTHING to reinforce it.

Maybe both is true. But that’s a stretch right? Right?!?!?!

Beyond that, there is literally two takes on reality playing out over the video. And there are no links to opposing points of view – it is as if the opposing view point doesn’t even exist.

What does it mean when our media re-writes itself?

Boing Boing decided to un-publish, remove from public view, Violet Blue related posts.

What does it mean when our media rewrites itself?

NYTimes: Link by Link – Poof! You’re Unpublished

Boing Boing on the matter.

Violet Blue (NSFW) on the matter.

There are quite a few fellow bloggers who have linked and commented about this – but without more info, it is just conjecture and I don’t wish to add to any of it.

However, I do want to stress the importance of the de-linking – note that the first two pages of Google search results on this subject don’t point to Violet Blue what so ever. You would think they would, but they don’t.

As Rafe states – links are currency on the Web. When we reach a certain level of influence, we’ve earned a responsibility, whether we want to own up to it or not. When we don’t live up to that responsibility, we lose credibility.

Boing Boing, in my book, has lost some.

Related:

Jeff Jarvis: Media is Singular (about time folks come around to this)

Politico: Media hype: How small stories become big news (what happens when new media take on old media mores or old media takes on new media mores or… well.. see above)

MSM Blog Networks Aren’t All That Bad

I hate the term “MSM” (Mainstream Media) that we bloggers use to describe older media and news organizations, but sometimes you need to acquiesce.

Lots of folks thought that members of traditional media couldn’t ‘do blogging’ for various reasons. They were wrong. Take a look around and you will find some of the best blogs are being produced in places once thought unlikely.

Wired Magazine’s Wired Blogs have some of the most interesting technology/geek focused blogs you could subscribe to.

For politics there are those hosted at The Atlantic.

And, at least in Philly, local newspapers have fully embraced them at Philly.com (The Inquirer and Daily News), philadelphia weekly, and Philadelphia City Paper.

Shoot, even local TV News shows have gotten in the act at NBC 10 and Fox 29.

The NYTimes gets into Blog Aggregation!

TechCrunch: NYTimes Blogrunner v. TechMeme.

They are using a technique I had originally suggested while I worked at Philly.com to handle the enormous legal and quality concerns – use a third party aggregator service like Blogrunner.

Bravo to the NYTimes 🙂