DISQUS

The Inquisitr: Australian News Corp chief attacks Google, bloggers

  • Tim Bennett · 5 months ago
    I wonder if it's a coincidence that none of the commentary on Hartigan's speech is engaging with the role of 'heritage media' in producing quality journalism. Rather - and this is typical of the blogosphere - the reaction has been "out of touch, out of readers, out of money".

    Yes, readers will be tapped for their "incredible eyewitness accounts... including amazing pics and video", but that same community of reader/authors does lack, as Hartigan says, the resources, expertise, and access that newspapers do. There's no contradiction in exploiting citizen journalism while acknowledging it can't have the same influence as a newsroom of professionals.

    I have a simple question: what do you think will fill the void if heritage media disappears?
  • dpnova · 5 months ago
    LOVE the tabloid comment... so sick of their papers!
  • Des Walsh · 5 months ago
    Erm, what was all that stuff his chief, Rupert, was going on about with the Boyer Lectures. Surely Hartigan the great survivor is not bucking the boss? Or maybe he didn't listen/read.
  • LaurelPapworth · 5 months ago
    Awesome post. I bow before greatness. :)
    Hartigan is an example of heritage media forgetting that their role is a community information role. Finding filtering and forwarding what is interesting to the community. Not dissing the community. Does he think his readers are from Venus and bloggers from Mars? Oh wait, there's a book title in there somewhere :P
  • sportszilla · 5 months ago
    Look, print publishers need to get the with the programme and realise that consumers will only increase their preference for digital, so the most prudent option is offer both and do it in multiple formats. News jumped the shark in Australia when they first tried to shut digital out by refusing to carry advertising for Monsterboard and other emerging online organisations and then by setting up independent digital divisions with their own budgets, identities, P&L's because they didn't think it would swim. Not only did these divisions swim, they drowned the parent publisher and had no requirement to collaborate.

    There are a lot of stakeholders to the issue of how to sustain the print industry. Newsagents are a segment that just constantly bellache and rarely come up with anything innovative. Newsagencies need to get into the 21st century and realise that their current business models will not survive unless they can figure out a way to get a clip of the digital ticket and this means working with digital publishing companies that can give them access to more magazines than they could possibly carry in store, and allow newsagents the rights to offer digital subscriptions.

    Right now in Australia, an increase in postal costs from Australia Post has got the whole print pubishing indutry in an uproar, claiming jobs will be lost. Everybody needs to realise that this “ohhhh, so many jobs are gonna be lost” is one of the most tired and hackneyed PR responses to price increases. IF the industry realises that digital publishing uses all the same production and editorial skills that print does, then there is no reason that jobs should be lost, and every reason for skills to simply converge and become even more relevant.
  • kollektor · 5 months ago
    "something of such limited intellectual value as to be barely discernible from massive ignorance" could be the Daily Tele's editorial mission statement.
  • mediamum · 5 months ago
    It was a joke when Rupert originally said it all and now his puppet demonstrates the lack of his autonomy - or understanding. I fear the last of the great media moguls may have lost the knack. Lemmings, meet cliff.
  • Joesurfer · 5 months ago
    Wow, incredible, absolutely crushed it.

    I consider myself a thinker along these lines and applaud the blistering and unforgiving commentary by Mr. Riley.

    The business model is out the window and the day of the media moguls has come & gone for the most part. How beautiful is it that if you have a great idea relating to journalism, entertainment, or media, you don't need some self important person in New York or Century City to greenlight it? You greenlight it yourself and make it happen.

    Also interesting is how fast Myspace has fallen from grace. No more than a couple years ago it seemed to be pegged as the key asset for the entire company going forward. It was the steal of the century having been bought for a paltry $500M. Now, it just looks like another flavor of the month (Delphi Internet?) who's days with the bloated Google contract are running out. Although none of the social network co.'s seem to be making money, Facebook is eating its lunch, and the trend is only picking up steam.

    The next few years are going to be very interesting.
  • cankles · 5 months ago
    The cream will rise to the top and demand an audience, and if they are smart - advertising or other revenue streams. As long as there are smart people reading smart content then advertisers will want to fund that channel. Call them bloggers, journalists, or monkeys.

    Blanket accusations from traditional, new, social, or whatever media is just tedious - there are leeches in both camps.

    Whinging about one or the other in general terms just shows you don't get online media.
  • Andrew McMillen · 5 months ago
    Awesome analysis - thanks, Duncan!
  • Raena · 5 months ago
    something of such limited intellectual value as to be barely discernible from massive ignorance.


    So he *does* read News' blogs, then...
  • Simon · 5 months ago
    "Does he think his readers are from Venus and bloggers from Mars?" beautifully said:)
    Yes, they like to cause problems from the air and then shout about it on every street ...