Richard Hine's Blog
February 13, 2013
I was just asked Open Rights Group to write a short piece for ORGzine about news, the state of the news business and the future of print in the digital age.
The (short) article is now live.
Here's the main conclusion:
"We now live in an age in which the internet is the newspaper. Where the paper of record has been replaced by the tweet of the moment. Where a journalist’s success is measured not by the quality of her work, but by the traffic it generates. Where a fake news story from The Onion becomes a major feature in China’s People’s Daily and we think that’s funny. Where twice-elected President Obama is either a pragmatic centrist or Hitler, depending on the audience. Where honest debate is polluted by PR people or drowned by trolls. And nothing ever stops. And making sense of the world is literally impossible. It’s an age where you’re either a cynic or a dittohead, so you better pick a side. And, in case I wasn’t clear, print is dead."
You can read the whole article here (if you do, please leave either a thoughtful comment in lower case, or SCREAM AT ME ANGRILY IN ALL CAPS):
http://zine.openrightsgroup.org/featu...
The (short) article is now live.
Here's the main conclusion:
"We now live in an age in which the internet is the newspaper. Where the paper of record has been replaced by the tweet of the moment. Where a journalist’s success is measured not by the quality of her work, but by the traffic it generates. Where a fake news story from The Onion becomes a major feature in China’s People’s Daily and we think that’s funny. Where twice-elected President Obama is either a pragmatic centrist or Hitler, depending on the audience. Where honest debate is polluted by PR people or drowned by trolls. And nothing ever stops. And making sense of the world is literally impossible. It’s an age where you’re either a cynic or a dittohead, so you better pick a side. And, in case I wasn’t clear, print is dead."
You can read the whole article here (if you do, please leave either a thoughtful comment in lower case, or SCREAM AT ME ANGRILY IN ALL CAPS):
http://zine.openrightsgroup.org/featu...
December 28, 2012
It's been a big Christmas for Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch!
My novel is now out in audiobook with a great reading by Aaron Abano. It's available on MP3 CD and as an Audible download (here's the US link):
http://www.amazon.com/Russell-Wiley-I...
Plus, in the UK, Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch has just been added to the "12 Days of Kindle" sale. It's only 99p for a limited time.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Russell-Wiley...
Best wishes for the holiday season -- and happy reading in 2013.
My novel is now out in audiobook with a great reading by Aaron Abano. It's available on MP3 CD and as an Audible download (here's the US link):
http://www.amazon.com/Russell-Wiley-I...
Plus, in the UK, Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch has just been added to the "12 Days of Kindle" sale. It's only 99p for a limited time.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Russell-Wiley...
Best wishes for the holiday season -- and happy reading in 2013.
November 23, 2012
For those who are impressed by credentials: I’ve had my work published in The New Yorker twice. Two captions. A total of 29 words. The first time was when I finished 3rd in the caption contest. The second time was when I won it. Here’s my winning entry (contest number 98):
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=98
How can YOU win--or at least make the Top 3 finalist stage, at which point America gets to decide?
Here are the only things you NEED to know (plus some links at the bottom to the many others things you may also WANT to know):
1. Start with the blindingly obvious.
This may be all you need. For example, when a killer whale is on trial in a courtroom, the lawyer protesting on his behalf SHOULD be saying: "Objection, Your Honor! Alleged killer whale." And that was indeed the winning caption.
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=147
The one drawback with the most obvious caption is that thousands of others will also think of it, and many may write it in a slightly better way than you do. I attended a New Yorker Festival event a few years back in which cartoon editor Bob Mankoff explained that he gets lots of angry letters from people who think their captions were stolen (e.g. by people who peek over their shoulder on airplanes). But the simple fact is, if you write the most obvious caption you will be competing with others who have done the same and only one of you will prevail. Also: even if your caption isn’t the most obvious, if it uses the same key words as the most obvious (e.g. “killer” and “whale”) it will not be a finalist.
2. Write a newspaper-style caption and then adapt it
For example, in one recent contest a shepherd with a flock of sheep on a New York City subway platform was talking to commuters inside a crowded train.
If this were a photograph in the paper, you might caption it thus:
A) Shepherd experiences trouble trying to guide his flock through the New York subway system
B) Shepherd tries to explain to angry subway passengers why he needs to board train with flock of sheep
C) Out-of-town shepherd, confused by NYC transit system, asks fellow passengers for directions
A creative adaptation of these three approaches would lead you to the finalists that week:
1st Place: "Come on! Do you have any idea how long it took to get through the turnstiles?" (Submitted by Michael Briddon, Cambridge, Mass.)
2nd Place: "For your information, I have a client who has a lot of trouble sleeping."
(Submitted by Richard Lee, Santa Monica, Calif.)
3rd Place "Sheep Meadow? No, we wanna see the 'Seinfeld' diner." (Submitted by Jon Bander, Astoria, N.Y.)
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=351
Personally, I think Jon Bander should have won.
3. Tell a story with universal appeal.
This isn’t as easy as it looks. Many of the funniest captions are rude or obscure or both. Whenever someone tells me their “funny” caption for the contest, I have trouble actually getting it because it’s only funny if you went to architecture school in Rhode Island in the 1970s.
In one of my favorite New Yorker caption contest cartoon winners, two men are looking through a door at an arm sticking up through quicksand and one says to the other: “Of course, the current tenant will be gone before the first of the month.”
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=74
The time I came third in the contest I tried something similar (I thought):
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=82
Seriously, that's all you need to know. But if you want more, here are some suggestions for FURTHER READING:
The real boss of this, New Yorker cartoon editor Bob Mankoff, explains how to win here:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs...
Former winner Patrick House explains his secrets in Slate:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/cu...
Angela Watercutter of Wired magazine “Cracks the Code” here:
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2011/0...
Here's an interview with me from when I won the contest, plus links to the thoughts of other contest winners:
http://emdashes.com/2007/06/oh-captio...
Follow me on Twitter @richardhine and I will keep posting my “failed” entries each week. Like this one:
https://twitter.com/richardhine/statu...
As you can see, I was robbed!
P.S. If you're in the mood for some more cartoons, the legendary Stan Mack (of Village Voice and Adweek fame) made these comic strips using "overheard" dialogue from my novel:
http://richardhine.com/comics
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=98
How can YOU win--or at least make the Top 3 finalist stage, at which point America gets to decide?
Here are the only things you NEED to know (plus some links at the bottom to the many others things you may also WANT to know):
1. Start with the blindingly obvious.
This may be all you need. For example, when a killer whale is on trial in a courtroom, the lawyer protesting on his behalf SHOULD be saying: "Objection, Your Honor! Alleged killer whale." And that was indeed the winning caption.
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=147
The one drawback with the most obvious caption is that thousands of others will also think of it, and many may write it in a slightly better way than you do. I attended a New Yorker Festival event a few years back in which cartoon editor Bob Mankoff explained that he gets lots of angry letters from people who think their captions were stolen (e.g. by people who peek over their shoulder on airplanes). But the simple fact is, if you write the most obvious caption you will be competing with others who have done the same and only one of you will prevail. Also: even if your caption isn’t the most obvious, if it uses the same key words as the most obvious (e.g. “killer” and “whale”) it will not be a finalist.
2. Write a newspaper-style caption and then adapt it
For example, in one recent contest a shepherd with a flock of sheep on a New York City subway platform was talking to commuters inside a crowded train.
If this were a photograph in the paper, you might caption it thus:
A) Shepherd experiences trouble trying to guide his flock through the New York subway system
B) Shepherd tries to explain to angry subway passengers why he needs to board train with flock of sheep
C) Out-of-town shepherd, confused by NYC transit system, asks fellow passengers for directions
A creative adaptation of these three approaches would lead you to the finalists that week:
1st Place: "Come on! Do you have any idea how long it took to get through the turnstiles?" (Submitted by Michael Briddon, Cambridge, Mass.)
2nd Place: "For your information, I have a client who has a lot of trouble sleeping."
(Submitted by Richard Lee, Santa Monica, Calif.)
3rd Place "Sheep Meadow? No, we wanna see the 'Seinfeld' diner." (Submitted by Jon Bander, Astoria, N.Y.)
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=351
Personally, I think Jon Bander should have won.
3. Tell a story with universal appeal.
This isn’t as easy as it looks. Many of the funniest captions are rude or obscure or both. Whenever someone tells me their “funny” caption for the contest, I have trouble actually getting it because it’s only funny if you went to architecture school in Rhode Island in the 1970s.
In one of my favorite New Yorker caption contest cartoon winners, two men are looking through a door at an arm sticking up through quicksand and one says to the other: “Of course, the current tenant will be gone before the first of the month.”
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=74
The time I came third in the contest I tried something similar (I thought):
http://contest.newyorker.com/?id=82
Seriously, that's all you need to know. But if you want more, here are some suggestions for FURTHER READING:
The real boss of this, New Yorker cartoon editor Bob Mankoff, explains how to win here:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs...
Former winner Patrick House explains his secrets in Slate:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/cu...
Angela Watercutter of Wired magazine “Cracks the Code” here:
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2011/0...
Here's an interview with me from when I won the contest, plus links to the thoughts of other contest winners:
http://emdashes.com/2007/06/oh-captio...
Follow me on Twitter @richardhine and I will keep posting my “failed” entries each week. Like this one:
https://twitter.com/richardhine/statu...
As you can see, I was robbed!
P.S. If you're in the mood for some more cartoons, the legendary Stan Mack (of Village Voice and Adweek fame) made these comic strips using "overheard" dialogue from my novel:
http://richardhine.com/comics
October 20, 2012
As a former Time Magazine employee (back in the 1990s, when three major newsweeklies were trying, mostly successfully, to convince advertisers they were not dinosaurs in the age of 24/7 cable news), I'm saddened by the announcement that Newsweek--Time's chief competitor since 1933--will cease appearing in print at the end of this year. But I'm not surprised.
These days, as I told Goodreads two years ago, "The Internet is the newspaper."
http://www.goodreads.com/interviews/s...
Last year, I wrote a blog post entitled "How to Survive the Death of Print: A Handy Guide for Newspaper and Magazine Employees"
I'm reposting it here for people still in the "old media" business wondering what, at least on a personal level, they should do now--and next.
--------------------------
Just so we’re clear: I’m here to help. Not to argue.
I know that as a newspaper or magazine employee you’re extremely capable of making a compelling case that: “print still has a place in people’s lives.” Maybe it does. But so does poetry. And badminton. And frankly we don’t have much time. So let’s move on.
Today I’m going to outline 10 simple steps that will show you exactly How to Survive the Death of Print. For your own sake, I hope you pay close attention.
Step 1. Stop being so defensive.
I have to point out that I’m still feeling a lot of resistance from you. I can feel you itching to tell me that nothing beats the feel a beautiful, glossy magazine in your pudgy, damp hands. Or the serendipity of coming across that one vitally important nugget of information you know is buried somewhere in your stack of unread papers. Take a deep breath. Hold it. Now let it go.
Step 2. Put as many of these words as you can into a single sentence.
App. Tablet. Paywall. SEO optimization. Monetization. Customization. Particle acceleration. Mobile. Geo-targeted. Click-through rate. Finish your sentence with this phrase: “but at the end of the day it’s all about the content, and that’s what’s going to set us apart.”
Step 3. Find out from FourSquare or Facebook Places where your company’s “digital guru” is at this moment.
Find her. Show her the sentence you just wrote. Ask her if it makes sense purely on technical terms. Then beg her to rewrite it into something a normal human being might understand.
Step 4. Memorize your revised sentence.
Use it in every meeting you attend and email you write for the next six months.
Step 5. Ignore that new piece of “good news” about print.
You may be tempted to trumpet some not-bad new statistic, like: “Newspaper ad revenues are declining slightly more slowly in the 3rd quarter.” Or: “In Norway, circulation in the women’s category fell only 0.7% last year.” Don’t fall into that trap. Remember step 1.
Step 6. Make your boss a key ally in your success.
The real world of print media is nothing like The Devil Wears Prada. Unless you’re working for Anna Wintour, your real boss will be nothing like Meryl Streep or the Miranda Priestly character. She will be sweet, charming and well-mannered, with only occasional freakouts. Ignore the freakouts. Just remember your boss is completely terrified of being usurped by a 25-year-old with the interpersonal skills of Mark Zuckerberg. Your challenge is to convince her you’re her loyal ally, and also that you “know digital” in a non-intimidating way. Every time Facebook decides on a new definition of “privacy” for 800 million people, make sure to volunteer to update your boss’s account settings. Note: You will also need to explain to her exactly what hashtags are at least once a month.
Step 7. Add the words “… and social media strategist” to your job title on your CV and include them in your Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn profiles.
Do this whether you’re a journalist, work in ad sales or circulation, or at the printing plant. But do this especially if you’re a higher paid executive who’s “at risk” the next time the company decides to “re-rationalize the cumbersome complexity” of its recently re-organized corporate structure.
Step 8. Cultivate a mentor.
Why do you need a mentor when you get on so well with your terrific boss? Because your boss will be fired within the next 6-12 months, that’s why. Seriously, are you not paying attention to what’s going on around you? Note: Your mentor should be somebody senior who has jokingly expressed jealousy of the way your boss has set up her Facebook privacy settings.
Step 9. Get up early each morning and read a quality newspaper.
This will make you better informed than any of your peers, but when they ask you how you know so much, point to your Blackberry, Android or iPad and say you get all your news whilst “on the go.” Reading a good newspaper will also help you identify other industries that might make sense for a smart, resourceful person like you when this whole thing goes pear-shaped.
Step 10. Focus on the big picture.
That great print brand you love so much, that gives you a reason to get up in the morning, is doomed. It’s sad. At times, you may be tempted to start drinking too much and gorging on greasy foods. Work out instead. You’ll want to look good and have a well-oxygenated brain if you plan on competing with all those whipsmart technogeeks in the world of “branded multi-platform digital content distribution.” And if that’s not your goal, working out now will help even more later. Truth is, your quirky sense of humor will only take you so far when you’re trying to find a new entry level position in whatever dynamic, growth-oriented industry you try to get into next. And trust me, after you lose that last 15 lbs and get a new haircut, you really will look and feel so much better.
These days, as I told Goodreads two years ago, "The Internet is the newspaper."
http://www.goodreads.com/interviews/s...
Last year, I wrote a blog post entitled "How to Survive the Death of Print: A Handy Guide for Newspaper and Magazine Employees"
I'm reposting it here for people still in the "old media" business wondering what, at least on a personal level, they should do now--and next.
--------------------------
Just so we’re clear: I’m here to help. Not to argue.
I know that as a newspaper or magazine employee you’re extremely capable of making a compelling case that: “print still has a place in people’s lives.” Maybe it does. But so does poetry. And badminton. And frankly we don’t have much time. So let’s move on.
Today I’m going to outline 10 simple steps that will show you exactly How to Survive the Death of Print. For your own sake, I hope you pay close attention.
Step 1. Stop being so defensive.
I have to point out that I’m still feeling a lot of resistance from you. I can feel you itching to tell me that nothing beats the feel a beautiful, glossy magazine in your pudgy, damp hands. Or the serendipity of coming across that one vitally important nugget of information you know is buried somewhere in your stack of unread papers. Take a deep breath. Hold it. Now let it go.
Step 2. Put as many of these words as you can into a single sentence.
App. Tablet. Paywall. SEO optimization. Monetization. Customization. Particle acceleration. Mobile. Geo-targeted. Click-through rate. Finish your sentence with this phrase: “but at the end of the day it’s all about the content, and that’s what’s going to set us apart.”
Step 3. Find out from FourSquare or Facebook Places where your company’s “digital guru” is at this moment.
Find her. Show her the sentence you just wrote. Ask her if it makes sense purely on technical terms. Then beg her to rewrite it into something a normal human being might understand.
Step 4. Memorize your revised sentence.
Use it in every meeting you attend and email you write for the next six months.
Step 5. Ignore that new piece of “good news” about print.
You may be tempted to trumpet some not-bad new statistic, like: “Newspaper ad revenues are declining slightly more slowly in the 3rd quarter.” Or: “In Norway, circulation in the women’s category fell only 0.7% last year.” Don’t fall into that trap. Remember step 1.
Step 6. Make your boss a key ally in your success.
The real world of print media is nothing like The Devil Wears Prada. Unless you’re working for Anna Wintour, your real boss will be nothing like Meryl Streep or the Miranda Priestly character. She will be sweet, charming and well-mannered, with only occasional freakouts. Ignore the freakouts. Just remember your boss is completely terrified of being usurped by a 25-year-old with the interpersonal skills of Mark Zuckerberg. Your challenge is to convince her you’re her loyal ally, and also that you “know digital” in a non-intimidating way. Every time Facebook decides on a new definition of “privacy” for 800 million people, make sure to volunteer to update your boss’s account settings. Note: You will also need to explain to her exactly what hashtags are at least once a month.
Step 7. Add the words “… and social media strategist” to your job title on your CV and include them in your Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn profiles.
Do this whether you’re a journalist, work in ad sales or circulation, or at the printing plant. But do this especially if you’re a higher paid executive who’s “at risk” the next time the company decides to “re-rationalize the cumbersome complexity” of its recently re-organized corporate structure.
Step 8. Cultivate a mentor.
Why do you need a mentor when you get on so well with your terrific boss? Because your boss will be fired within the next 6-12 months, that’s why. Seriously, are you not paying attention to what’s going on around you? Note: Your mentor should be somebody senior who has jokingly expressed jealousy of the way your boss has set up her Facebook privacy settings.
Step 9. Get up early each morning and read a quality newspaper.
This will make you better informed than any of your peers, but when they ask you how you know so much, point to your Blackberry, Android or iPad and say you get all your news whilst “on the go.” Reading a good newspaper will also help you identify other industries that might make sense for a smart, resourceful person like you when this whole thing goes pear-shaped.
Step 10. Focus on the big picture.
That great print brand you love so much, that gives you a reason to get up in the morning, is doomed. It’s sad. At times, you may be tempted to start drinking too much and gorging on greasy foods. Work out instead. You’ll want to look good and have a well-oxygenated brain if you plan on competing with all those whipsmart technogeeks in the world of “branded multi-platform digital content distribution.” And if that’s not your goal, working out now will help even more later. Truth is, your quirky sense of humor will only take you so far when you’re trying to find a new entry level position in whatever dynamic, growth-oriented industry you try to get into next. And trust me, after you lose that last 15 lbs and get a new haircut, you really will look and feel so much better.
July 9, 2012
I have a new blog post up at the New Wave Authors site: How to Write a Novel in 30 Years or Less.
It even comes with a guarantee: "If you follow its advice, you will have written at least one full draft of a novel in 30 years or less. And hey, even if you’re not happy with the result the first time, you can always go back and start over."
http://newwaveauthors.com/Blog.aspx?P...
Please post a comment on the site or right here on Goodreads... bookmark NewWaveAuthors.com for regular news and blog posts from a growing list of 20+ authors... and follow @NewWaveAuthors on Twitter, too.
It even comes with a guarantee: "If you follow its advice, you will have written at least one full draft of a novel in 30 years or less. And hey, even if you’re not happy with the result the first time, you can always go back and start over."
http://newwaveauthors.com/Blog.aspx?P...
Please post a comment on the site or right here on Goodreads... bookmark NewWaveAuthors.com for regular news and blog posts from a growing list of 20+ authors... and follow @NewWaveAuthors on Twitter, too.
May 3, 2012
You may have heard a lot or a little about Amazon's recent entry into the book publishing business.
The company now has 6 imprints--Amazon Encore, Amazon Crossing, Thomas & Mercer, 47 North, Montlake Romance and The Domino Project--that cover a variety of genres and have published, re-published, translated and otherwise introduced to readers a variety of great authors from around the world.
The company will be making even more waves this fall when its NY publishing house--Amazon Publishing--headed by Larry Kirshbaum releases its first fall list.
But this post isn't about Amazon and its business model and its future plans.
It's about the authors.
Specifically, it's about group of authors (me included) who have had the good fortune to be published by Amazon over the past couple of years who have now gotten together and created their own website.
In truth, Rob Kroese, author of Mercury Falls and Mercury Rises, did all the work, while the rest of us told him how great it would be and promised to write blog posts as often as possible to keep the content continually fresh.
In the "About" page on the site, Rob explains how it all came about:
"During one conversation... I floated the idea of a website that would serve as a sort of hub for Amazon authors -- a place to talk about our experiences with writing and publishing, to keep readers up-to-date on our works in progress, and to reach more potential readers. To say that the idea was met with enthusiasm would be a significant understatement. I spent my spare time over the next several weeks building a site that would meet those goals. The result was this site, New Wave Authors."
The site is not affiliated with Amazon Publishing or Amazon.com. It's just a bunch of us--19 so far, and likely more to come--blogging, sharing ideas, and maybe getting some feedback too.
I hope you'll check it out:
http://newwaveauthors.com/
The company now has 6 imprints--Amazon Encore, Amazon Crossing, Thomas & Mercer, 47 North, Montlake Romance and The Domino Project--that cover a variety of genres and have published, re-published, translated and otherwise introduced to readers a variety of great authors from around the world.
The company will be making even more waves this fall when its NY publishing house--Amazon Publishing--headed by Larry Kirshbaum releases its first fall list.
But this post isn't about Amazon and its business model and its future plans.
It's about the authors.
Specifically, it's about group of authors (me included) who have had the good fortune to be published by Amazon over the past couple of years who have now gotten together and created their own website.
In truth, Rob Kroese, author of Mercury Falls and Mercury Rises, did all the work, while the rest of us told him how great it would be and promised to write blog posts as often as possible to keep the content continually fresh.
In the "About" page on the site, Rob explains how it all came about:
"During one conversation... I floated the idea of a website that would serve as a sort of hub for Amazon authors -- a place to talk about our experiences with writing and publishing, to keep readers up-to-date on our works in progress, and to reach more potential readers. To say that the idea was met with enthusiasm would be a significant understatement. I spent my spare time over the next several weeks building a site that would meet those goals. The result was this site, New Wave Authors."
The site is not affiliated with Amazon Publishing or Amazon.com. It's just a bunch of us--19 so far, and likely more to come--blogging, sharing ideas, and maybe getting some feedback too.
I hope you'll check it out:
http://newwaveauthors.com/
April 9, 2012
It's five years since famed media journalist and Rupert Murdoch biographer Michael Wolff wrote an article for Vanity Fair headlined "Billionaires and Broadsheets."
In it, he described an unnamed billionaire who was interested in the "cheap" opportunities reflected in the 2007 valuations of newspaper companies:
"He knew nothing whatsoever about the newspaper business, or news. Zip. Nada. I am not sure he quite understood that it was a bleak business. I offered that there are many people who believe that the commercial viability of big-city dailies will be kaput within five years.
He said, with affable certainty, and as though agreeing with me, Oh, but there will always be lots and lots of people who want to read a newspaper."
The full article is here: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/fe...
Of course, newspapers were not necessarily "cheap" in 2007, as we found out last week when the Newsosaur blog (a great source of newspaper industry analysis) reported the sale of the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News at just 10% of their 2006 value.
Details here: http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/04...
But five years later, it seems that billionaires are still the best hope newspapers have. As David Carr just wrote in "The Return of the Newspaper Barons," a new article in The New York Times:
"If most newspapers are an uneconomical proposition incapable of sustaining profits, let alone pay off the debt so many buyers have larded on them, who is left to own them?
Rich guys."
The only difference is that, five years after Wolff's article, the rich guys now buying papers (Buffett in Omaha, Sussman in Maine, plus the Philly consortium) no longer think they can "cut their way to former glory and renewed profitability." Writes Carr: "In each instance, the buyer was motivated, at least in part, by the fact that newspapers faced an existential threat: but for the new owners and their deep pockets, they might go away."
Full article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/bus...
As Carr makes clear, the renewed interest of billionaires in newspapers is based more on a desire to further specific business and political interests than any thought that there are new solutions to the newspaper business model. Which means the crisis continues, as reflected in this week's Newsosaur headline: "Publishers lost $27 in print for every digital $1."
Ouch.
-------
p.s. I gave Goodreads my own thoughts on the future of newspapers and the billionaires who buy them in this 2010 interview about my own "wry look at an imploding newspaper," Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch:
http://www.goodreads.com/interviews/s...
In it, he described an unnamed billionaire who was interested in the "cheap" opportunities reflected in the 2007 valuations of newspaper companies:
"He knew nothing whatsoever about the newspaper business, or news. Zip. Nada. I am not sure he quite understood that it was a bleak business. I offered that there are many people who believe that the commercial viability of big-city dailies will be kaput within five years.
He said, with affable certainty, and as though agreeing with me, Oh, but there will always be lots and lots of people who want to read a newspaper."
The full article is here: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/fe...
Of course, newspapers were not necessarily "cheap" in 2007, as we found out last week when the Newsosaur blog (a great source of newspaper industry analysis) reported the sale of the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News at just 10% of their 2006 value.
Details here: http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/04...
But five years later, it seems that billionaires are still the best hope newspapers have. As David Carr just wrote in "The Return of the Newspaper Barons," a new article in The New York Times:
"If most newspapers are an uneconomical proposition incapable of sustaining profits, let alone pay off the debt so many buyers have larded on them, who is left to own them?
Rich guys."
The only difference is that, five years after Wolff's article, the rich guys now buying papers (Buffett in Omaha, Sussman in Maine, plus the Philly consortium) no longer think they can "cut their way to former glory and renewed profitability." Writes Carr: "In each instance, the buyer was motivated, at least in part, by the fact that newspapers faced an existential threat: but for the new owners and their deep pockets, they might go away."
Full article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/bus...
As Carr makes clear, the renewed interest of billionaires in newspapers is based more on a desire to further specific business and political interests than any thought that there are new solutions to the newspaper business model. Which means the crisis continues, as reflected in this week's Newsosaur headline: "Publishers lost $27 in print for every digital $1."
Ouch.
-------
p.s. I gave Goodreads my own thoughts on the future of newspapers and the billionaires who buy them in this 2010 interview about my own "wry look at an imploding newspaper," Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch:
http://www.goodreads.com/interviews/s...
April 4, 2012
Page One: Inside The New York Times is a compelling fly-on-the-wall documentary (released in 2011) that takes you inside the newsroom during a stressful, challenging time in The Gray Lady's history. It's out now on DVD and available for streaming via Amazon.
It's 2010, and as newspapers all around the country are going bankrupt, things are looking dire at The Times too. The question is, if it's this tough for the New York Times - and by extension every other national and major metro newspaper - what hope is there for everyone else?
For those who know the industry, the challenges are not new: Like most US newspapers, the NYT is struggling in the age of the internet. The high costs of the "legacy" business - a big newsroom, a network of global bureaus, a dead-tree product distributed inefficiently by a fleet of trucks, etc. etc. - are slamming up against a declining print readership and, even more importantly, a cratering ad market, with the Classified section already savaged by Craigslist and the "expensive" display advertising market tanking in the face of a brutal recession.
But if the future is all online, where does the future revenue come from? Especially in a world where, as the Times's Brian Stelter points out, more and more online readers have, "grown up in the era where everything seems free."
Beyond the business questions, the film also explores the crucial debate about the role newspapers like the Times play in American society. Are they, as then-Executive Editor Bill Keller says, "essential to a functioning democracy." Do they still fulfill the mission described by famed Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein of delivering "the best obtainable version of the truth"?
Among the 2010 news stories we see covered: The release of the Wikileaks cables. The final pullout of combat troops from Iraq. The Times reporting on the bankruptcy of Sam Zell's doomed experiment at the Tribune Company. Plus, stories crucial to the Times's own future: the launch of the iPad, the decision to charge for access to the Times online. (This attempt to reinvent the online business model with a "metered paywall," is described by media and tech guru Clay Shirky as the "NPR model" relying on the support of a faithful, well-intentioned audience so that a product may survive to serve the general good.)
At one point Sam Zell is seen (in a clip from a YouTube video) talking to his newspaper employees explaining how he will save the Tribune Company because "he is not a newspaperman, (but) a business man."
The movie follows business columnist David Carr - a star of the movie - as he reports on the collapse of Sam Zell's Tribune Company, the biggest media bankruptcy in history. When explaining how CEO Randy Michaels and a handful of executives extracted $100 million in bonuses even as billions of dollars of value evaporated, Carr wryly states: "you could call that incentives or you could call that looting, depending on your perspective."
Later we see how David Carr's extensive takedown of the "frat-house" culture that helped destroy the morale of Tribune employees comes together--and how Carr relies on "the muscles of the institution" of The Times to get to work when the Tribune lawyers threaten legal action before his story goes to press.
Watch this movie and you will, I'm sure, care about the answers to the questions it raises: Can news(papers) be saved? Can reporting staffs and foreign bureaus be saved? What is journalism in the age of Twitter and Wikileaks? Who will pay to keep newspapers going? How much do we all lose if and when the journalism now produced by newspapers goes away?
It's 2010, and as newspapers all around the country are going bankrupt, things are looking dire at The Times too. The question is, if it's this tough for the New York Times - and by extension every other national and major metro newspaper - what hope is there for everyone else?
For those who know the industry, the challenges are not new: Like most US newspapers, the NYT is struggling in the age of the internet. The high costs of the "legacy" business - a big newsroom, a network of global bureaus, a dead-tree product distributed inefficiently by a fleet of trucks, etc. etc. - are slamming up against a declining print readership and, even more importantly, a cratering ad market, with the Classified section already savaged by Craigslist and the "expensive" display advertising market tanking in the face of a brutal recession.
But if the future is all online, where does the future revenue come from? Especially in a world where, as the Times's Brian Stelter points out, more and more online readers have, "grown up in the era where everything seems free."
Beyond the business questions, the film also explores the crucial debate about the role newspapers like the Times play in American society. Are they, as then-Executive Editor Bill Keller says, "essential to a functioning democracy." Do they still fulfill the mission described by famed Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein of delivering "the best obtainable version of the truth"?
Among the 2010 news stories we see covered: The release of the Wikileaks cables. The final pullout of combat troops from Iraq. The Times reporting on the bankruptcy of Sam Zell's doomed experiment at the Tribune Company. Plus, stories crucial to the Times's own future: the launch of the iPad, the decision to charge for access to the Times online. (This attempt to reinvent the online business model with a "metered paywall," is described by media and tech guru Clay Shirky as the "NPR model" relying on the support of a faithful, well-intentioned audience so that a product may survive to serve the general good.)
At one point Sam Zell is seen (in a clip from a YouTube video) talking to his newspaper employees explaining how he will save the Tribune Company because "he is not a newspaperman, (but) a business man."
The movie follows business columnist David Carr - a star of the movie - as he reports on the collapse of Sam Zell's Tribune Company, the biggest media bankruptcy in history. When explaining how CEO Randy Michaels and a handful of executives extracted $100 million in bonuses even as billions of dollars of value evaporated, Carr wryly states: "you could call that incentives or you could call that looting, depending on your perspective."
Later we see how David Carr's extensive takedown of the "frat-house" culture that helped destroy the morale of Tribune employees comes together--and how Carr relies on "the muscles of the institution" of The Times to get to work when the Tribune lawyers threaten legal action before his story goes to press.
Watch this movie and you will, I'm sure, care about the answers to the questions it raises: Can news(papers) be saved? Can reporting staffs and foreign bureaus be saved? What is journalism in the age of Twitter and Wikileaks? Who will pay to keep newspapers going? How much do we all lose if and when the journalism now produced by newspapers goes away?
April 3, 2012
Stephanie Campisi who runs the Australian literary website Read In a Single Sitting was one of the first people to review "Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch" back in 2010.
When she asked to interview me for her site recently, I was more than happy to oblige, especially as her questions gave me the chance to talk about the writing of "Russell Wiley," the future of newspapers, politics, social media and my attempts to be less annoying:
http://www.readinasinglesitting.com/2...
Thanks, Stephanie!
When she asked to interview me for her site recently, I was more than happy to oblige, especially as her questions gave me the chance to talk about the writing of "Russell Wiley," the future of newspapers, politics, social media and my attempts to be less annoying:
http://www.readinasinglesitting.com/2...
Thanks, Stephanie!
April 2, 2012
I'm pleased to announce that my comic novel "Russell Wiley Is Out to Lunch" is on sale this month for just $1.99 in Amazon's US Kindle store.
It's part of Amazon's "100 Kindle Books for $3.99 or Less" promotion.
"Russell Wiley" is a corporate satire set in the New York media industry as a fictional business newspaper struggles to survive in the age of social media while trying to figure out how to please its new billionaire-owner.
In the words of one Amazon reviewer: "This book is simply hilarious. While it takes place in a newspaper business with all the attending issues of the changes taking place in that world, the politics are more universal for most offices today. The way in which our protagonist negotiates each idiotic or petty crisis is a study in calm desperation. The ending was truly satisfying but I won't say more about that. Do read this one and see for yourself."
If you think that sounds worth checking out, here's a link to the Amazon page for "Russell Wiley is Out to Lunch": http://amzn.to/HczZ3o
If not, here's the full list of the 100 Kindle books on sale at Amazon this month: http://amzn.to/HR6hlM
It's part of Amazon's "100 Kindle Books for $3.99 or Less" promotion.
"Russell Wiley" is a corporate satire set in the New York media industry as a fictional business newspaper struggles to survive in the age of social media while trying to figure out how to please its new billionaire-owner.
In the words of one Amazon reviewer: "This book is simply hilarious. While it takes place in a newspaper business with all the attending issues of the changes taking place in that world, the politics are more universal for most offices today. The way in which our protagonist negotiates each idiotic or petty crisis is a study in calm desperation. The ending was truly satisfying but I won't say more about that. Do read this one and see for yourself."
If you think that sounds worth checking out, here's a link to the Amazon page for "Russell Wiley is Out to Lunch": http://amzn.to/HczZ3o
If not, here's the full list of the 100 Kindle books on sale at Amazon this month: http://amzn.to/HR6hlM
