17
Feb 12

The shift of power from print to digital: a hinge moment

Buried on page 11 of this week’s Spectator was eloquent evidence of a slow but inexorable shift with large consequences: the transfer of power and influence from printed newspapers to digital publishing.

Oh that, you may say. Old news. Isn’t that already blindingly obvious? Doesn’t this blog go on about just that all the time?

Yes, but that doesn’t mean that everyone sees it. Big, slow changes are hard to trace and measure when you’re living in the middle of them. And newspapers still have a central role, clout and readers. But have a look at Charles Moore’s short note about the importance of Conservative Home and its owner, the Tory peer Michael Ashcroft. Moore describes Ashcroft as on his way to being “the Beaverbrook of the internet age.”

I pick this example of because it is hard to imagine a magazine less likely to fall for hype based on a techno-fad than the Spectator. The same applies to Moore, who as a political commentator is interested in power and its use. What he is observing here is a redistribution of political influence caused by the technological revolution of the last fifteen years. Old powers will wane; new ones will use the opportunities to rise. Digital is transformative and not adaptive change.

Continue reading →

Share

24
Jan 11

History’s rough first draft – and the story of a “pseudo-event”

John Naughton’s column in The Observer yesterday mentioned something I’d missed in by Peter Maas in the New Yorker: a superb dissection of the now-notorious “statue-toppling” image captured as American troops rolled into Baghdad in 2003. This meticulous reconstruction should be read by anyone tempted to opine about media literacy, news, pseudo-events, spin and related topics.

By paying close attention to cause and effect, Maas underlines and confirms a complaint which started circulating on the day that pictures of Saddam’s statue being hauled down by American marines: that the event did not symbolise any kind of popular feeling by Iraqis. There were very few of them there.

But Maas also shows something which will disappoint those for whom this episode confirms every worst fear about the manipulation of international public opinion by the US government. No one organised or orchestrated the statue’s destruction. It just happened in the heady buzz of the unexpectedly – and as it turned out, misleadingly – easy victory won by the Americans.

But it made a neat, easy-to-grasp image which captured a lot of unrealistic hopes in one image. It zipped round the world and began creating myths on its own. The picture acquired a power no one had tried to give it.

Share

30
Aug 10

“Web Death”, the fallout

While I was away, the argument about whether or not the web is dead, killed by the rise of apps (as argued by Chris Anderson and Michael Wolff – see here), boomed back and forth. Mostly wrong as it was, the original piece nevertheless dislodged some illuminating ripostes. Some of the better pieces:

  • A good new-readers-start-here summary from The Observer.
  • Some expert debunking here from John Naughton.
  • A different angle from Frederic Filloux of the excellently quirky Monday Note.
  • Lastly, an upbeat lateral route outwards from this debate and towards the cheering idea that portable, wireless devices – be they called smartphones, tablets, e-books or whatever – are now getting so neat that and useful that long-form journalism may be better and better read. From Bobbie Johnson of The Guardian and with links to new sites specialising in promoting long-form.

Continue reading →

Share

22
Jun 10

Read and enjoyed: Naughton, Moore and two rig-disaster reconstructions

A miscellany of links. This is a clear and knowledgeable piece of sense about the internet and the future by John Naughton, which gives wider currency to his celebrated image of the imaginary opinion pollster in Mainz 18 years after the invention of printing. And he extends the image underlining how uncertain the future is to St Petersburg in 1917. Literate futurology with a hinterland.

Martin Moore  has been at a Knight Foundation conference in the US and summarises what he learnt about the latest local news initiatives there.

The first long-form investigative reconstructions of the rig disaster are starting to appear. Two of the best have been in magazines and not newspapers. This is from GQ and this from Rolling Stone. The latter (“The Spill, the Scandal and the President”) is notably more critical of Obama than most other media, blaming him for the failure to clean up the oil regulators.

Share