Taylor and I wrote a piece about a 8 months ago called “Missing the Link” about how newspapers don’t understand the internet. We’ve shipped it around and had it read by people at the Columbia Journalism Review, New York Times, the Globe, Wired among other places and the feedback has been really positive… but no one will publish it. Seems like the print media isn’t interested in talking about how it is failing to understand and address the biggest threat to its existence.
So while our piece was fairly interesting 8 months ago it is starting to age. Sad.y this hit home last night while watching the Simpsons with Mike and Dawn last night (sidebar: for the first time in ages – not because I don’t like the Simpsons but because I invariably watch “TV” on my computer these days).
The scene opens up with Dan Rather introducing the media panel at the Democratic Party Debate in Springfield (being held in Springfield, and before New Hampshire, for reasons not worth getting into here).
Dan Rather (in an upbeat voice): With me here to comment on today’s democratic debate is Andrea Crowley of CNN, Demonte Evans of Slate Magazine and… (dropping to a semi-derogatory voice) Ron Lahar of the Washington Post.
Nelson pops up
Nelson: Hah Hah, your medium is dying.
Principal Skinner: Nelson…!
Nelson: But it is!
Principal: There’s being right and then there’s being nice.
Ouch. you know things are bad when even the Simpsons are making fun of you. It means your (impending) death has permeated the popular culture.
eaves.ca 
I saw that episode, too. It was funny, but I think in suggesting the death of print media, you wield too broad a brush. Although I would agree that readership of physical newspapers is down (and not likely to recover), the reduction in the cost of creating print media has led to some reasonable growth in particular areas — particularly niche magazines, and, of course, celebrity gossip. zOMG! Britney’s boobs!
In any case, both the Simpsons’ episode and your mention of a dying print media reminded me of another blog post I read recently. It was written by a VC from New York and referenced a report by Goldman Sachs talking about the future of media in general.
http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2008/01/what-my-kids-te.html
I saw that episode, too. It was funny, but I think in suggesting the death of print media, you wield too broad a brush. Although I would agree that readership of physical newspapers is down (and not likely to recover), the reduction in the cost of creating print media has led to some reasonable growth in particular areas — particularly niche magazines, and, of course, celebrity gossip. zOMG! Britney’s boobs!In any case, both the Simpsons’ episode and your mention of a dying print media reminded me of another blog post I read recently. It was written by a VC from New York and referenced a report by Goldman Sachs talking about the future of media in general. http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2008/01/what-my-kids-…
Pingback: Simpsons Episode Criticizing Print Media « Your World Today
I totally agree with you David but in my opinion this reduction consisted of those people who were not serious readers. This reduction is the by-product of horizontal expansion of the print media as mentioned by Mr. Young.
I totally agree with you David but in my opinion this reduction consisted of those people who were not serious readers. This reduction is the by-product of horizontal expansion of the print media as mentioned by Mr. Young.
Pingback: newsroomnext » If ‘The Simpsons’ says the print newspaper business is doomed, is it true?
Pingback: Simpsons Episode Criticizing Print Media | Kick Media
Pingback: Simpsons Episode Criticizing Print Media « KICK MEDIA
On this topic again, there's a great Charlie Rose interview with Marc Andreessen. At about the 27:00 minute mark they start talking about the New York Times. Andreessen does not like the Grey Lady. His advice: kill the print edition. After some prodding by Rose, he declares, “Yes, stop the presses right now.” Watch it here: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10093