A recent study from the UK notes the decline in newspaper readership among all age brackets, but especially younger readers (people younger than 35 years old). Like many studies striving to sound an alarm, the language is a bit charged, […]
The US Federal Trade Commission and Google spar openly over the future of journalism. Guess which one comes out looking more modern?
Newspapers are running out of ideas. A litany of desperate measures don’t bode well for a dying industry.
Sure, the news is a commodity now, but perhaps losing the data is what triggered the beginning of the end for newspapers.
Do scholarly and scientific publishers risk more than they realize when they embrace modern media spectacle and seek to marginalize the PDF?
Seth Godin wonders if we’ll miss newspapers. For a growing proportion of the population, it’s already a moot point.
Privacy concerns seem aimed at the small stuff, but could expand into a system of censorship.
The network effect is a peculiar thing. It can be about lolcats or insurrection. Either way, it’s a new and different power.
Innovations in scholarly communications often come about through bold and often reckless investments in new capacity, for which the utility is not always obvious.
Demand Media has created a journalism and custom content platform that disrupting neighboring publishing models. Can we learn something from their approach?
Print aficionados and newspaper companies are rushing to bridge a chasm, but even their ACME product may not be enough.
Another open access plug piece, this time in the Gray Lady herself, but fed from London (yet again). Is there something more to all this?
Newspapers created a choke point for information supply. How do we avoid creating a hole at the center in the age of the demand economy?
The Christian Science Monitor drops daily print. The big news may be that it still exists at all.
Scholarly publishers risk following the newspaper industry if they don’t value peer-review.