The closing session at the World Economic Forum in Davos was by Benjamin Zander. If you ever wondered what a secular sermon would sound like (it was Sunday morning), then it would probably go a little like this.
It’s quite a schtick (72 minutes in all), but when Zander finished there was barely a dry eye in the house*:
The Telegraph may have Martin Sorrell and Ben Verwaayen blogging from here in Davos, but the FT is covering the waterfront with half a dozen or so blogging participants.
There’s an interesting piece on Sovereign Wealth Funds from Stephen Roach of Morgan Stanley.
But broadly the wider Davos blogging canvas looks like this:
So the Telegraph, with two bloggers, gets a 50 per cent strike rate (thanks to Sorrell). But hedging its bets, the FT only really scores with Roach and Davies, from a line-up of eleven.
Still, there is more post content over at the FT.
I like to think of myself as faux modest with some self-serving, self-censorship thrown in for good measure.
Which type of blogger are you?
A Davos day. I guess it is the proximity that makes Davos what it is. This morning I had a few words with Jacob Zuma. Said hi to Mohamed Chebaro of Al Arabiya. Then a brief chat with the Duke of York, met on the stairs. Saw an old college chum who is now a poverty campaigner.
Cherie Booth stopped to talk on her way to meet Mary Robinson. A brush past Hamid Karzai and Pervez Musharraf. Then passed the time of day with Michael Arrington. David Schlesinger and Nic Fulton of Reuters showed off their nifty new mobile journalism kit, the Nokia N-82. Heads of State apart, most people are here stripped of the usual barriers to access.
You just need something to talk about. Recommended conversational gambits:
I just ran into Michael Arrington, who although he is a tech journo, still has an eye for a story. He was in a Davos session led by Jeff Jarvis when Columbia President Lee Bollinger piped up about government-funded journalism:
When the business model of “real journalism” fails, what should society do in response? When things are considered important, but can’t be supported with a business model, government sometimes steps in. National parks, highways, police and national defense are all examples. Should print journalism be next?
Last week Ralph Whitehead wrote about the issue for the Boston Globe, but said government must not step in. Today at a session led by Jeff Jarvis at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, noted Free Speech lawyer and Columbia University President Lee Bollinger said it should be considered as a viable solution to the problem. Carl Lavin at Forbes picked up the story, and I’m now squarely in the middle of it.
At first Bollinger only mentioned it as an idea put forward by others. When I questioned him, he said he supported the notion.
The idea is both dangerous and absurd. For Bollinger, who is a free speech advocate, to even consider the idea suggests he hasn’t thought through the consequences of the government financing the press. Freedom of the press is one of the most important checks on government. If they’re paying the bills, the press is no longer independent.
Even from the Swiss Alps, I can see Steve B at Future of News (link on the right) lighting up. Meanwhile, Carl Lavin asks for reaction from Nick Lemann.