March 15, 2009
Irony alert – Bush Library and funding
I do find it ironic that the economic clusterfuck presided over by our “MBA President” could stall fundraising to build his library. I hope it also slows construction of his mental institution institute.
Petraeus running for president in 2012?
Yes, yes, sometimes, a trip to Iowa, for a college commencement, may just be a trip to Iowa, but will Gen. David Petraeus have any other motive a visit to Iowa next year, as the Spectator speculates?
Long derided by progressives as a highly politicized general even by the standards of the modern, politicized, U.S. military, a Petraeus run would certainly change the Republican equation in some way. Or would it?
If President Obama achieves his pledge of getting all troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011, that leaves only Afghanistan as a battleground. Petraeus’ combat-level experience in Iraq then becomes irrelevant.
Of course, Petraeus would have to get the GOP nomination first. And, a dying ember of social conservatives would be sure to grill him on his stance on hot-button issues.
And, if the economy has done a decent amount of rebounding by the end of 2011, any GOP candidate will have an uphill road to climb.
Long derided by progressives as a highly politicized general even by the standards of the modern, politicized, U.S. military, a Petraeus run would certainly change the Republican equation in some way. Or would it?
If President Obama achieves his pledge of getting all troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011, that leaves only Afghanistan as a battleground. Petraeus’ combat-level experience in Iraq then becomes irrelevant.
Of course, Petraeus would have to get the GOP nomination first. And, a dying ember of social conservatives would be sure to grill him on his stance on hot-button issues.
And, if the economy has done a decent amount of rebounding by the end of 2011, any GOP candidate will have an uphill road to climb.
Clay Shirky on the ‘whys’ of newspaper demise
Clay Shirky has three great posts on why the online newspaper world, as a business model, is basically vaporizing. I’m going to look at all three.
First, Shirky gives us the big picture of where we’re at today and why, including why the TV-radio model, the “digital garden” model of pay circulation, the micropayment model like iTunes and others, won’t work.
Here’s his nut graf, about one-quarter the way down:
He next looks at the details of why some proposed alternative models won’t work, and have already been proven that way, at least to some degree:
Shirky then pronounces his judgment, and it’s a somber one:
Shirky goes on to like how the Internet is doing some form of what (we hope) Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction” to print media is the biggest such change since Gutenberg and the printing press.
I insert the link multiple times because this is a LONG blog post; twice as long as many a newspaper column, and because it’s WELL worth reading. So read it.
But, as I said, this is only one of three posts.
Shirky also tackles the details of the micropayments model and why it won’t work. First, we relisten to the same songs, but don’t re-read the same newspaper story. Second, Napster and its kin have been declared illegal; blogging and hyperlinks have done something different in media.
He then takes a more general look at the micropayments model. He says part of the problem is that the various micropayments models under discussion are entirely publisher-driven and don’t take the reader into account.
If that’s not enough for you, back in 2003, Shirky listed out the multitude of failed micropayment programs.
Read all four, not three, links I’ve provided, and accept that the mass-audience newspaper of today is probably doomed.
That all said, Shirky is light on prescriptions for the future.
And, as I blogged last week, online advertising is becoming the junk mail of the Internet world.
If various versions of charge-for-content aren’t going to work, and, with Shirky’s acknowledgement that the Gutenberg Revolution 2.0 will throw out lot of experimental models, at the least, I’d like to see Shirky throw out some ideas, and handicap some of the more promising models out there.
First, Shirky gives us the big picture of where we’re at today and why, including why the TV-radio model, the “digital garden” model of pay circulation, the micropayment model like iTunes and others, won’t work.
Here’s his nut graf, about one-quarter the way down:
The curious thing about the various plans hatched in the ’90s is that they were, at base, all the same plan: “Here’s how we’re going to preserve the old forms of organization in a world of cheap perfect copies!” The details differed, but the core assumption behind all imagined outcomes (save the unthinkable one) was that the organizational form of the newspaper, as a general-purpose vehicle for publishing a variety of news and opinion, was basically sound, and only needed a digital facelift. As a result, the conversation has degenerated into the enthusiastic grasping at straws, pursued by skeptical responses.
He next looks at the details of why some proposed alternative models won’t work, and have already been proven that way, at least to some degree:
“The Wall Street Journal has a paywall, so we can too!” (Financial information is one of the few kinds of information whose recipients don’t want to share.) “Micropayments work for iTunes, so they will work for us!” (Micropayments only work where the provider can avoid competitive business models.) “The New York Times should charge for content!” (They’ve tried, with QPass and later TimesSelect.) “Cook’s Illustrated and Consumer Reports are doing fine on subscriptions!” (Those publications forgo ad revenues; users are paying not just for content but for unimpeachability.) “We’ll form a cartel!” (…and hand a competitive advantage to every ad-supported media firm in the world.)
Shirky then pronounces his judgment, and it’s a somber one:
Round and round this goes, with the people committed to saving newspapers demanding to know “If the old model is broken, what will work in its place?” To which the answer is: Nothing. Nothing will work. There is no general model for newspapers to replace the one the internet just broke.
Shirky goes on to like how the Internet is doing some form of what (we hope) Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction” to print media is the biggest such change since Gutenberg and the printing press.
I insert the link multiple times because this is a LONG blog post; twice as long as many a newspaper column, and because it’s WELL worth reading. So read it.
But, as I said, this is only one of three posts.
Shirky also tackles the details of the micropayments model and why it won’t work. First, we relisten to the same songs, but don’t re-read the same newspaper story. Second, Napster and its kin have been declared illegal; blogging and hyperlinks have done something different in media.
He then takes a more general look at the micropayments model. He says part of the problem is that the various micropayments models under discussion are entirely publisher-driven and don’t take the reader into account.
If that’s not enough for you, back in 2003, Shirky listed out the multitude of failed micropayment programs.
Read all four, not three, links I’ve provided, and accept that the mass-audience newspaper of today is probably doomed.
That all said, Shirky is light on prescriptions for the future.
And, as I blogged last week, online advertising is becoming the junk mail of the Internet world.
If various versions of charge-for-content aren’t going to work, and, with Shirky’s acknowledgement that the Gutenberg Revolution 2.0 will throw out lot of experimental models, at the least, I’d like to see Shirky throw out some ideas, and handicap some of the more promising models out there.
‘No religion’ on the rise
Since 1990, the percentage of Americans identifying themselves as having “no religion,” whatever that may mean for them, has increased in every state in the nation.
A fair chunk of that is the "spiritual but not religious" crowd, but some of it is downright agnosticism or atheism.
A fair chunk of that is the "spiritual but not religious" crowd, but some of it is downright agnosticism or atheism.
Obama: G20 split talk is ‘phony debate”
President Barack Obama was talking about the idea that there’s a split between the U.S. and much of the rest of the G20, over whether to engage in more theoretically stimulative government spending, or to focus on financial regulation.
Well, President Obama, you can prove this is a phony debate, and that you’re not too tired, by having a financial institutions regulatory bill sent up to Congress by no later than June 1. That would prove that re-regulation is as ‘front and center” as you say it is.
Well, President Obama, you can prove this is a phony debate, and that you’re not too tired, by having a financial institutions regulatory bill sent up to Congress by no later than June 1. That would prove that re-regulation is as ‘front and center” as you say it is.
If any financier needs nationalizing, it’s AIG
Instead of having Timmy Geither beg, plead and wheedle with AIG not to pay out $165 million in bonuses, nationalize the damned company if Geithner believes the government doesn’t have the power to prohibit such bonuses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)