redherring.com — The New York Times, the gray lady of establishment journalism, plans to begin posting user-generated video in March, according to company exec Nicholas Ascheim. Journalists are "expensive," he says. "That's why user-generated content is interesting."
Feb 1, 2007 View in Crawl 4
strictneinFeb 2, 2007
@foxhaze:You think people with a journalism major have a clue about anything? They are assigned a news story, go and interview a couple of "experts", and then write a story. They have very little understanding of the underlying details about what they write.I'd rather read the blog of a major player in than some journalism major who doesn't really know a damn thing about the topics they're writing about.
positronFeb 2, 2007
The time to change or die was at least 5 years ago. They missed the bus. The only option left them now is what they would like on their gravestone.
mstarFeb 2, 2007
@RadiantBeingThe print side may have lost money (as are most newspapers these days) , the web side is highly profitable...@surfmadpigI doubt they'd get rid of journalists who make video - in fact I imagine they'd expand
petronskiFeb 2, 2007
***The New York Times, the gray lady of establishment journalism...She ain't no lady, she's a lying whore.
dadiggdogFeb 2, 2007
The most expensive thing is the journalists themselves. That’s why user-generated content is interesting.The most expensive thing is the royalties themselves. That’s why piracy is interesting.
palmerFeb 3, 2007
"They are assigned a news story, go and interview a couple of "experts", and then write a story. They have very little understanding of the underlying details about what they write."I was about to object to that characterization of journalism students, but that is indeed where the craft stands today, at least in terms of the popular outlets. Especially on the mark is the reference to this "experts" crap. Put some schmoe on the screen with the label "expert", and you're done.In the meantime, the story usually fails to answer the first question that a viewer would have.Meanwhile, the gross overpayment for YouTube will continue to become apparent as Web video hosting becomes a worthless commodity.
palmerFeb 3, 2007
I'm sure it's already on PooTube.