Also, note one of the ideas advanced by Martin Langeveld, was one of the
four people to whom CJR gave pre-release access to the report so that they
could write conversation-starting comments. Martin's comment is here:
http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/report_ignores_webs_nimble_nat.php
The idea he advances is something we talked about among the RJI Fellows
last year -- "Report for America." I'd love some feedback on what anyone
thinks of this idea, and how it might be funded and launched.
Martin wrote:
" -- Report for America. With Teach for America as a model, could the nation
(or better yet, a well-heeled foundation) fund one-year, post-college
fellowships for young reporters who might apprentice at mainstream or new media
organizations with the only requirement that they produce works dealing with
important civic issues?"
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:41:51 -0400
From: mike hoyt <mh...@columbia.edu>
Reply-To: CJR Press Release Recipients <cjr-...@lists.jrn.columbia.edu>
To: CJR Press Release Recipients <cjr-...@lists.jrn.columbia.edu>
Subject: [WINDOWS-1252] Schudson and Downie^Twhat think?/CJR
Dear reader,
Yesterday the J-school where we live released a report by Michael
Schudson, a communications professor at Columbia, and Len Downie, the
former editor of The Washington Post. The report, available in a
reader-friendly shorter version on CJR.org (and in the next issue of
the Columbia Journalism Review), starts with a broad overview of the
business models and animating philosophies of the many non-profit,
for-profit, hybrid, and university-housed journalism startups that
have come to life across the country in the last few years.
Schudson and Downie argue that these encouraging efforts could
increasingly supplement the American news diet, but that they are
also fragile, and in danger of fading away without significant
financial help from society. They make six specific recommendations
for changes in policy that would create an environment that sustains
serious reporting in all realms—commercial, noprofit, and public media.
The responses are rolling in—in newspapers, on Twitter, and on blogs.
We also invited four media thinkers to respond to the report, on our
site. And tomorrow, Schudson will respond to the responders.
But first we’d like to extend an invitation to all readers of the
report to discuss its findings here, in today's News Meeting feature
on CJR.org. What do you think of Schudson and Downie’s diagnosis of
the causes of journalism’s financial and readership declines? What
about their summation of the state of play today? Which of their
recommendations would you support and which give you pause? And,
perhaps most of all, what do you think this report misses or gets
wrong about the past, present, and future of journalism? Join the
discussion.
And in the first of a series of regular podcasts on CJR.org, our
Clint Hendler interviews Michael Schudson and Len Downie about their
landmark report. We hope you enjoy it.
the Editors
The Reconstruction of American Journalism
What do you think of the report?
By The Editors
http://www.cjr.org/news_meeting/the_reconstruction_of_american_2.php
Podcast: Leonard Downie and Michael Schudson
By Clint Hendler
http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/podcast_leonard_downie_and_mic.php
e.g.
Expenses
Debt Servicing
Management salaries
Editor salaries
Reporter salaries
Printing costs
Distribution Costs
Revenues
Subscriptions
Classifieds
Business Advertising
Other
As an example, looking at NYT's 3rd quarter 2008 10-Q it looks like New York
Times Revenues were
256,000 Subscriptions
83,000 Classifieds
315,000 Business Advertising
There costs are harder to figure out from the 10-Q, since there seems to be
no differentiation for wages and benefits for reporters, editors and
management salaries; they had big expenses like $111,000 for 'other
production costs' and $321,000 for Selling, general, and administrative
costs.
Aldon
If so, I'm aldon...@googlewave.com there. I've already run into a bunch
of political friends there.
Also, I was at the Digital Publishing and Advertising Conference in New York
City on Tuesday. Steve Brill of Journalism Online was there debating Mike
Linksvayer of Creative Commons on the Free v. Paid debate. You can read my
comments about that at
Debunking Digital Publishing and Advertising Myths
http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/3804
Aldon