{"id":3014,"date":"2009-03-17T18:59:52","date_gmt":"2009-03-17T18:59:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/?p=3014"},"modified":"2009-03-17T21:41:52","modified_gmt":"2009-03-17T21:41:52","slug":"clay-shirky-wrong-newspapers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/2009\/03\/clay-shirky-wrong-newspapers\/","title":{"rendered":"Clay Shirky: wrong about newspapers"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span class=\"drop_cap\">C<\/span><strong>lay Shirky<\/strong>&#8216;s irritatingly trite post (you <a href=\"http:\/\/www.google.co.uk\/search?hl=en&amp;q=clay-shirky&amp;btnG=Google+Search&amp;meta=\">find it<\/a> &#8211; Clay doesn&#8217;t believe in hyperlinking on his blog) deserves an equally irritating and trite response.<\/p>\n<p>But in the spirit of pedantry, let&#8217;s just pick on one of his small but sweeping asides:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cThe <em><strong>Wall Street Journal<\/strong><\/em> has a paywall, so we can too!\u201d (Financial information is one of the few kinds of information whose recipients don\u2019t want to share.)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(God put his commandments on tablets of stone, Shirky hides them in parentheses.)<!--more--><\/p>\n<p>What is it about financial information that makes its recipients so lacking in the reciprocity department? I mean precisely what exclusive, actionable information is lurking behind that <em>Wall Street Journal<\/em> paywall?<\/p>\n<p>And what masonic financial secrets are revealed by premium subscription access (a bonus-busting <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ft.com\/cms\/275bc334-3063-11dc-9a81-0000779fd2ac.html?segid=70009&amp;segsrc=fthome\">\u00a33.99<\/a> a week) to the <em><strong>Financial Times<\/strong><\/em>&#8216; Lex column? Does <strong>Martin Wolf<\/strong> also tip stocks?<\/p>\n<p>Are people really trading off this stuff?<\/p>\n<p>You know the answer, and it&#8217;s not what Shirky implies.<\/p>\n<p>The reason these papers can charge subscribers is because their readers make up a community that uses the content to orient themselves in what you might call (if you were <a href=\"http:\/\/www.shirky.com\/bio.html\">the kind of person<\/a> who liked making up these terms) <strong>the topography of professional information<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>To be direct, there is a value in knowing what everyone else in your community knows in order to place a value on your own particular knowledge.<\/p>\n<p>The <em>WSJ<\/em> and the <em>FT<\/em> are promontories in the broad information landscape of their (still) wealthy and educated readership (although <a href=\"http:\/\/cityfile.com\/dailyfile\/4171\">not everyone<\/a> plays ball), who are willing to pay their modest fees for the privilege of reading them online, on the phone or on paper.<\/p>\n<p>So the paywall content is not financial information whose recipients don&#8217;t want to share. It&#8217;s just good old-fashioned news and comment for finance professionals, read in the knowledge that a lot of other finance professionals will be reading it too and thus making it modestly useful in their everyday working lives.<\/p>\n<p>It doesn&#8217;t mean that paywalls will work for everyone. For example, in Hong Kong English-language daily the <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scmp.com\/\"><em>South China Morning Post<\/em><\/a><\/strong> has one, but faces free competition from the <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thestandard.com.hk\/\"><em>Standard<\/em><\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>But when an aggressive price-cutter like <strong>Rupert Murdoch<\/strong> keeps a paywall in place (for just one of his suite of news products), you know it&#8217;s a model that has its niche. It&#8217;s just a niche based around a professional community, not around the value of information <em>per se<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>So that&#8217;s a different explanation to Shirky&#8217;s one line dismissal. Different but important.<\/p>\n<p>Other annoyances? Shirky&#8217;s sweeping summary of <strong>Elizabeth Eisenstein<\/strong>&#8216;s <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/books.google.co.uk\/books?id=WR1eajpBG9cC\"><em>The Printing Press as an Agent of Change<\/em><\/a><\/strong> (that was a link Clay BTW) from thirty years ago, misses the really interesting shift she highlights (so far as journalists are concerned): the disappearance of popular news content from sermons. &#8220;The pulpit was ultimately displaced by the periodical press,&#8221; she writes in <em><a href=\"http:\/\/books.google.co.uk\/books?id=5xIP4UVqHZ8C\">The Printing Revolution in early Modern Europe<\/a><\/em> (p.105). Now that is interesting, but Clay probably doesn&#8217;t consult on it.<\/p>\n<p>(Shirky&#8217;s breathless progressivism ignores the fact that printing standardised texts destroyed many of the innovations and experimentalism of the medieval literary world, e.g. the commonplace book, marginalia, etc.)<\/p>\n<p>The real problem I have is that Shirky thinks that American newspapers are doomed because of digital technology, and on that he is just plain wrong.<\/p>\n<p>US newspapers began their relative decline because the lives of millions of Americans were changed by two things that defined the 20C &#8211; cars and television &#8211; and that decline started at the beginning of the 1970s.<\/p>\n<p>And guess what? Today there are too many of those newspapers, employing too many people and there are going to be less in the future.<\/p>\n<p>But let&#8217;s save the cod history for the history of cod, and the futuristic waffle for the waffles of the future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Clay Shirky&#8216;s irritatingly trite post (you find it &#8211; Clay doesn&#8217;t believe in hyperlinking on his blog) deserves an equally irritating and trite response. But in the spirit of pedantry, let&#8217;s just pick on one of his small but sweeping asides: \u201cThe Wall Street Journal has a paywall, so we can too!\u201d (Financial information is [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3014","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-journalism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3014","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3014"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3014\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3023,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3014\/revisions\/3023"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3014"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3014"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/adrianmonck.com\/about\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3014"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}