By Jayson Jarmon, CEO, Lux Worldwide
There is a natural antagonism between the traditional media and the Internet as an information delivery system—always has been. As we have seen in the case of music and entertainment, the Internet created a dilemma because it made content and intellectual property freely available to users, skirting the traditional mechanisms for revenue generation. The old newspaper media has been slow in adopting the new realities, because it would mean walking way from their time-honored approach to money-making—a leap few were willing to make. The results have been disastrous for the movie and music industries, with record declines in revenue. And the same issue is now facing the printed news industry.
The revenue model for newspapers is a simple one: develop/distribute news content, and take money from both subscribers and advertisers. As long as the content is under “control,” this approach is viable. But when the content becomes free-flowing, and the information is available without having to pay for a piece of paper, the model breaks down.
And it has been breaking down, with record declines in traditional newspaper circulations. A recent Washington Post article noted that 814 of the nation’s largest daily papers had seen nearly a 2% decline in circulation in the last year alone, continuing a slide which began in 1990 and is intensifying with each successive wave of Internet adoption. The newspaper industry, unable to face this basic reality head-on, goes on to blame changes in the nation’s new telemarketing rules, but the truth is far grimmer. If they cannot find a viable online advertising or subscription model, they are doomed.
And why not? Virtually everyone I know has a sentimental attachment to that newspaper and morning coffee, but let’s put it aside for a moment. Newspapers have had it too good – they take their money form both sides, both readers and advertisers; they are essentially non-democratic, reflecting the editorial view of major corporate and governmental entities (made crystal clear, I’m afraid, by the newspapers’ un-critical support for the Iraq War); they are fractious organs of argument designed to produce heat, but very little light, in a world of useless point/counterpoint skirmishing.
The Internet, gives users the power of multi-perspectivism, the ability to see different angles on the news expressed locally, nationally, and internationally. It delivers the information freely to one’s desktop, and is simply faster, cheaper, more convenient. And, while I know many would argue this point, I think the vaunted “Truth” which newspapers ought to be accountable to tell, is understood better as an amalgamation of facts and varied points of view—not the party line that is expressed by editorial boards and self-appointed pundits.
Of course the Internet is full of frauds and untruths as well, but it is our own responsibility now to act as the filter and arbiters of what is meaningful. In the Internet Age, we can no longer responsibly delegate that task to others.
