The future of newspapers is a bit like climate change: there are now far fewer ‘old-media’ deniers.

February 4th, 2007

Said Guardian Editor Alan Rushbridger. Writing from Davos he says in his post Davos 07: ADD vs OCD

The delicate question of old versus new economic models isn’t reached until near the end of the three-hour session, all on Chatham House rules (you can report what they said, but not who said it.) A distinguished magazine editor finally broke through the cosy bonding by denying that we could all have “both/ and”. It was “either/or.” We couldn’t run away from the fact that there wasn’t yet a credible economic model for old media owners to be dabbling around with the new kids on the block. So choices had to be made.

Yes, well. Safer to talk about the “soft” issues of community and blogging. A blogging entrepreneur drew a useful distinction between old mainstream media (MSM) which had attention deficit disorder and the best bloggers, who were obsessive compulsive. Newspapers started out on stories or campaigns and then got bored. Bloggers never got bored of their own subjects.

In his final summing up Rushbridger reflects

There have been many such discussions over the years – but few with such a concentration of high-level engagement from the people running so-called old media organisations. The discussion was unfocussed and (as always) inconclusive. But it’s a bit like climate change. Five years ago a lot of time was wasted listening to the deniers. Now there are very few: The nature of the problem has dawned on everyone – and an industry which is notoriously uncollaborative is actually getting together to find some solutions.

Life is Local || Newspapers embracing the digital age? || Broadband Strategies in a Converged World

Bookmarks: