University students unwittingly funding radical agendas with their money

Post-modern print journalism: keep calm and carry on

"Buy the ticket, take the ride" - A mantra for post-modern journalism

Cynical economist types like to say that “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. In other words, everything in life comes at a cost; to you or to someone else. News media are no exception to this fact.

For years, print journalism depended on a business model that relied heavily on a monopolistic ability to sell ads. Classified adds were just one example of that. In essence, a newspaper used a revenue generating source, such as advertising, to support areas of journalism that would not pay for themselves.

Now, I’m not saying anything revolutionary. In fact much of what I have to say I’ve learned from others such as Clay Shirky.

“Writing about the Dallas Cowboys in order to take money from Ford and give it to the guy on the City Desk never made much sense, but at least it worked,” writes Shirky in a lengthy prognosis of journalism on his blog.

But then along came the internet. The internet revolutionized news media because now newspapers no longer had a strangle hold on advertising. Instead of having a few newspapers and billboards to choose from, advertisers now had a bajillion websites to choose from. Bye-bye business model.

“Online, though, the economic and technological rationale for bundling weakens—no monopoly over local advertising, no daily allotment of space to fill, no one-size-fits-all delivery system,” writes Shirky.

Even worse for print journalism was the migration of content to the internet.
Who wants to pay for a newspaper with yesterday’s news when they can read it online as soon as it is written? So amidst much anxiety and fear-mongering, print journalism ran into a big iceberg called the internet.

Now, the fear is that if traditional print media goes down the tube, society will lose a valuable tool in the constant struggle to hold those in power accountable. The average pleb is not the New York Times. He or she doesn’t have the time, the money or necessarily even the skills to bite off a large chunk of investigative journalism.

But wishing that it ain’t so doesn’t make reality go away. The truth is that we are very much in a time of transition. And the reality of it is that this is actually a very exciting time.

A June 2011 piece in The economist entitled “The future of news:Back to the coffee house” suggested that the internet is returning the trade back to the “conversational culture” prior to mass media.

“The internet is making news more participatory, social, diverse and partisan, reviving the discursive ethos of the era before mass media. That will have profound effects on society and politics,” writes The Economist.

However, as the article points out, mass media are actually doing quite well in many parts
of the world. Where they are in decline is primarily in wealthy countries.

So what kind of potential business models are on the table? Let’s take a look:

• Paywalls: In this model the reader must pay to view online content. A paywall can be “hard” – minimal to no access of content without paying or “soft” – where the reader has more access to content.

While this kind of revenue approach might work for certain niche content that is in high demand, it’s not going to be an effective way of marketing generic content. Besides, the trend with the internet has been towards free content. So putting up paywalls could be seen as a little archaic.

• Government subsidies: This would see taxpayers fork over cash to journalism in the name of preserving its societal role of exposing corruption and oppression. How this would work exactly would remain to be seen, but perhaps it would function something like the CBC.

One major issue with this type of business model is that it puts more control of media in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats. In theory, journalists act as a sort of check and balance to power in society. The closer that power – governments or corporations – gets to managing journalism, the less effective counterweight it becomes.

• Private subsidies: In a donation-based model journalism would be funded through voluntary contributions. This could be either a lot of average-Joe types giving a few dollars each or wealthy individuals and corporations handing over larger amounts of funding.

Private voluntary donations do not seem like a bad idea, but the model also doesn’t seem like a viable cure-all to newspapers’ ills.

• The invisible hand: Or perhaps better worded: the nuclear option. The invisible hand was classical economist Adam Smith’s term to describe the self-guiding force of the market. In other words, leave the fate of journalism to “natural selection”.

Consider this the laissez-faire approach to journalism. By meddling in the market for news we might actually retard the organic development of exciting new business models and modes of delivery. The free market has proven itself a highly effective way of producing and delivering goods and services to the masses. This is also the most democratic approach as well.

So to sum things up. Print-journalism’s old money-for-ads business is dying – at least in rich countries. The blame for this rests mostly with the internet. This has resulted in much fear and loathing and the ensuing chaos is re-defining journalism. A few possible business models are paywalls and private/public subsidies. These three are not definitive solutions. But nor is the fourth, which is to leave everything up to the market. However, this is probably the most viable and most democratic solution in the long run.

News is about to get a lot more individualistic and participatory. It’s going to seem a lot more fractured and more like the sum of many parts. But I don’t think big journalism is about to go away any time soon, so you can take off the tin foil hat.

It might seem self evident but the future is not in more of the past. Or as Hunter S. Thompson once put it: “Buy the ticket, take the ride.”

Occupy Toronto: a celebration of medieval life

Got weed?

The following is a piece of satire and is not intended to be a serious piece of journalism. Although all quotes are verbatim from real sources at Occupy Toronto, not all statements are intended to reflect reality.

By Samuel Greenfield

Toronto – Hundreds of medieval reenactors braved a nasty weather forecast last week in a move of solidarity with 13^th century peasants.

The group, which has pitched their tents at the St. James campground located at Church and King Streets, has gathered to protest against a variety of alleged injustices they say are being propagated by Stephen Harper and capitalist pigs.

Protestors say that one per cent of the population is controlling 99 per cent of the gold coins and lucky charms and say it’s getting really hard to find good ganja. Some of them are even calling for a Robin Hood tax.

Members of the rag-tag troupe started assembling in the shadow of the neo-gothic St. James church last week after similar movements broke out in other kingdoms. And although it is not yet clear how long protestors will stay, rumours are circulating that they are trying to set a new record time for not bathing – and that could be a REALLY long time.

Inside the encampment people bang on drums, sing songs, smoke weed and walk around full of enthusiasm for a more simple life without modern hygiene.  By Saturday, straw had materialized to cover up the mucky spots in the camp caused by walking around too much in the rain.

And although they are a group of heroes to some, they are viewed with suspicion by others.

One man, who would only reveal his identity as “Irish”, said they have already caught several infiltrators they believe were working together with The Man.

“They try to sneak in, but we get told ahead of time, they send in under-covers to see what’s going on,” said Irish.

But so far no one has been able to shift them out of their tents and back to Kensington Market.

Michael Anonymous has a dark hood pulled up over his head, and sports a mysterious-looking goatee. He is a dark wizard – a profession hit hard by the recent economic recession. And he says he has great hopes for the campers.

“I believe this is the chance for a brand new economy, a brand new society, and this is the start: right here,” said Michael.

Meanwhile, V for Vendetta fans were hoping for a surprise appearance by legendary Englishman, Guy Fawkes, and were really depressed to hear that he was executed 405 years ago. Fawkes is best known for trying to blow up parliament in England.

Also making their presence well-known in the camp were the Marxists and Communists who are still carrying banners, handing out newspapers and wearing funny hats almost a century after starting a big party in Russia that would result in a really big hangover. Shockingly, they are now charging a fee of $1 for some of their handouts.

But not all protestors are looking for handouts. One kind girl offered the author a bagel.

And despite the fact that the gathering is seen as disorganized and unnecessary by some, there is no denying the atmosphere of peace and happiness in the camp – although it is possible that this might be the result of an abundant supply of marijuana.

Occupy Toronto protestors take to the streets of Toronto

An Occupy Toronto protestor at Nathan Phillips Square

Protestors gather at Nathan Phillips Square in Toronto after marching from their encampment at Church and King Streets

A Protestor at Nathan Phillips Square

My first story for the Toronto Sun

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/28/election-signs-vandalized

The future of the David Dunlap Observatory

The David Dunlap Observatory

The proposed development of the lands surrounding a Richmond Hill landmark  has become of the subject of fierce debate.

Built in 1935, the David Dunlap Observatory was owned by the University of Toronto until 2008 when it was sold for $70 million to Corsica Development Inc.

Once surrounded by farmland the observatory is now surrounded by subdivisions on the ground and hampered by light pollution in the night sky.

The observatory is still open to the public and is operated voluntarily by members of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.

At present, the town of Richmond Hill has yet to approve the plan to develop the site. And some, such as the Richmond Hill Naturalists, would like to see the entire 189-acre site preserved.

Recent mediation through the Ontario Municipal Board was unsuccessful, but talks are scheduled to resume in December.

 

 

 

Phone Photos