Philip Gomes

Somewhere between Twitter and a blog 
Filed under

abc

 

A short post on Mark Scott's media speech

Serious media observers far and wide have had their say about ABC supremo Mark Scott's speech about the new media environment, Rupert Murdoch and private versus public publishing and broadcasting options.

Here's mine.

Scott's speech was un-remarkable, important not for it's content but for who was making it. Notable in that a public broadcaster was defining a different version to content publishing and production that that currently envisaged by Murdoch and his ilk.

But then, for the millions of people who have spent time exploring new forms of publishing content online in a first hand manner over the past decade, none of what he had to say would be news.

You could see this coming a mile away. Where was Scott five years ago?

Best line of the day goes to Ben Eltham at New Matilda.

In the land of the blind, the man with a print-out of a Clay Shirky blog is king.

It's funny, 'cause it's true.

Still, it appears Scott is listening, unlike it seems, Murdoch and his vocal partner in paid content, the AP's Tom Curley.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   abc   australia   keynote   mark scott   media   speech  

Comments [0]

Adding dead weight to public broadcasting's saddle bags

In New Matilda Jeff Sparrow writes what I consider to be a misguided piece attempting to make the case for a publicly funded (I presume national) newspaper.

An ABC newspaper would be primarily responsible for the provision of high-quality print journalism. It would employ sufficient reporters to cover the news, in a way that no-one else can. But it would also be responsible for picking up other socially useful functions of newspapers as the old media companies gradually discard them. For instance, all across the United States, papers have been cutting back on their book reviews. Today, only the New York Times and the San Francisco Chronicle maintain a stand-alone review section, and you can see the same shrinkage beginning to happen here.

This totally misses the point of what is happening to newspapers. To wit, Collapsing ad revenues and a cost of production and distribution model that no longer stands up in the era of the web.

Sparrow is a supporter of public broadcasting, so he should understand that the last thing we need to do is saddle an already (financially) strained public broadcasting infrastructure with the costs of producing a print newspaper.

Think of what the ABC (include SBS if you like) would have to acquire in terms of assets. Printing presses, trucking and an even bigger newsroom to deliver what is already delivered on the web and broadcast without adding overheads to the network.

Propping up a media business model that is dead man walking is not how I'd like to see my money spent - I'll leave that to Rupert Murdoch. 

Journalists shouldn't be working a dead media beat, they need to be fully engaged in the future of media to come.

A better option is to do what the Government is already doing; nation building (imperfect as it might be) with the delivery of high speed broadband covering all corners of Australia.

That exercise will on it's delivery drive all kinds of media innovation as yet unimagined by Sparrow, or anyone else for that matter.

Indeed, the ABC itself recognises this future, rolling out localised online news sites to Australians, much to the displeasure of our current free market media organisations. 

I find this attachment to print a perplexing one. I understand nostalgic and romantic attachments to things that have served us well in the past, but in the case of print media I think that this is serving to delay the inevitable - a day when print, like many technologies before it, is consigned to memory.

Additional reading: Five ways paid content can work.

This post is part of Dave Winer's blog post friday initiative. 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   abc   blog post friday   media   new matilda   print  

Comments [0]