Comments on: Content vs. journalism: the great debate

By: Mark Briggs

Mark Briggs — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:11:08 +0000

I think of content as information, but define it broadly to include all types (news, opinion, humor, etc.) and all forms (text, audio, video, SMS, etc.). So a more practical approach to learning the ropes of digital publishing would be to include a much wider scope than just journalism. This is the focus I wish more schools would explore.

By: jeremyhead

jeremyhead — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:35:11 +0000

Interesting post. You define journalism, but you don’t really define what you mean by ‘content’. What do you mean by the term?

By: Mark Briggs

Mark Briggs — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 23:07:17 +0000

While many of us who studied and practiced journalism wish that our passion for the important work that journalists do would support a business model in the digital age, it unfortunately is not the case. The reality is that we need to build better content businesses to help pay for journalism because, by itself, journalism is not a business model and never has been.

Blogging didn’t break the business model, either. Local distribution monopolies paid for journalism in the past, Now that they’re gone, let’s train students on how to contribute to viable content businesses so that, one day, they might get the chance to practice the sacred craft once again.

By: Journa Liz S. Ramirez

Journa Liz S. Ramirez — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:00:56 +0000

This saddens me, as a graduate of journalism. To cheapen our craft to a mere “content” is a huge slap on every journalists face who have passion, and poured out sweat and blood to finish and pursue (and perhaps paractice the course).
This I consider is a big fight content vs. journalism. It is very rampant and almost inevitable, considering the power of the “internet.”
And another thing which decreases the value of journalism — blogging. This is another issue: blogging vs. journalism.

By: John Perry

John Perry — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:52:39 +0000

People won’t pay for public affairs journalism for the same reason that people don’t vote, especially in smaller local elections — rational ignorance. Everyone wants and benefits from good government policy. But that benefit has to be weighed against the probability that my efforts to become informed and vote for the best policy will effect the election results. And since that probability is close to zero, the rational thing for me to do is to let my neighbor, sap that he is, do all that hard work and trust that he’ll do good by me.

By: Mark Briggs

Mark Briggs — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:56:48 +0000

It’s interesting to note that there is a vibrant news site called paidContent that publishes a steady flow of news about the business of content, usually with figures in the millions for deals. (The site was started as a side project by journalist Rafat Ali because he couldn’t find a journalism job and has since sold it for a nice windfall.)

I have yet to find a site called (or focused on) PaidJournalism.

But you’re right, no one is drawn to the calling of content.

By: Jamie Favreau

Jamie Favreau — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:28:08 +0000

I think if you offer a pay model for exclusive content then you are generating revenue but you have to market the content as “exclusive.”

Content or journalism does not really matter it is the message which is being sent which matters and how people perceive it.

By: Paul Balcerak

Paul Balcerak — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:26:47 +0000

I think the content vs. journalism semantics debate matters, too, but only because it represents a cultural and mental shift in the way traditional journalists look at their work. “Content” seems so cold—where’s the blood, sweat and tears? But with the advent of the social Web, news is what the masses say it is; it’s not about Pulitzers and the trusted newsman anymore.

It’s humbling and even scary to think that one’s job has basically shifted from being a hired gig to being an elected office, but that’s essentially the effect social media has had on journalism—and the public trust is more fickle and fragile than ever.