Is this sub just for giving out about newspapers?

dohboy

I assumed it might be for industry people and/or discussion, but it seems to be just mostly giving abuse and denigrating the newspaper and the media in general?

L1011

dohboy wrote: »

I assumed it might be for industry people and/or discussion, but it seems to be just mostly giving abuse and denigrating the newspaper and the media in general?

If you talk to industry people, there is generally little else they talk about. Print media is in a death spiral, broadcast media is now basically owned by either the state or one of three megalomaniac billionaires (Murdoch, O'Brien, Malone) and extremely regulated/formulaic.

reason vs religion

dohboy wrote: »

I assumed it might be for industry people and/or discussion, but it seems to be just mostly giving abuse and denigrating the newspaper and the media in general?

Little awareness that the IT, for such a small readership, shapes up admirably in comparison with some of the top international papers.

Comhrá

L1011 wrote: »

If you talk to industry people, there is generally little else they talk about. Print media is in a death spiral, broadcast media is now basically owned by either the state or one of three megalomaniac billionaires (Murdoch, O'Brien, Malone) and extremely regulated/formulaic.

Ant today's front page layout from www.independent.ie just about sums up the current state of quality that paper has now plumbed:

http://www.independent.ie/

reason vs religion

tippman1 wrote: »

Ant today's front page layout from www.independent.ie just about sums up the current state of quality that paper has now plumbed:

http://www.independent.ie/

Independent.ie is editorially separate from the papers.

dohboy

L1011 wrote:

If you talk to industry people, there is generally little else they talk about. Print media is in a death spiral, broadcast media is now basically owned by either the state or one of three megalomaniac billionaires (Murdoch, O'Brien, Malone) and extremely regulated/formulaic.

I'm sure industry people still have an appreciation of the work that goes into putting out a paper/TV/radio and don't generally go around trashing the medium, even if things are tougher than ever. I guess I expected more nuanced discussion than 'The Indo/Sun/Irish Times etc is a rag!' rubbish, that you can read frankly in every other forum on Boards, and beyond.

L1011

dohboy wrote: »

I'm sure industry people ... don't generally go around trashing the medium

You haven't even been present with more than 1 person who works in the media industry, then. Other outlets as well as issues with their own are constant core topics.

IRE60

reason vs religion wrote: »

Independent.ie is editorially separate from the papers.

Perhaps! But they ultimately report to the editor in chief - editorially different due to the differing medium employed and the immediacy or one - but not editorially separate.

As for 'insiders' rubbishing their own medium, Jesus its a bitch-fest/.

One senior media person refered to their place of work as the "marie celeste"..........

dohboy

L1011 wrote:

You haven't even been present with more than 1 person who works in the media industry, then. Other outlets as well as issues with their own are constant core topics.

I'm well aware there is a cynicism and gallows humour in the media and newspapers, but considering the size of the industry in this country at least, many people have worked across a number of outlets and generally understand the graft than goes on, even on the most frivolous red tops.

I guess I had assumed this forum might be the one refuge wjere hacks could go to be spared having to read various papers compared to toilet paper etc but reading some of the other threads it appears not!

Roadtoad

Ah go on. This sub also serves for people who cannot sleep in the wee hours. Other threads are for people who cannot sell their words......

jmcc

reason vs religion wrote: »

Little awareness that the IT, for such a small readership, shapes up admirably in comparison with some of the top international papers.

What a wonderfully funny observation. Oh, wait! You are serious?

Regards...jmcc

L1011

dohboy wrote: »

I'm well aware there is a cynicism and gallows humour in the media and newspapers, but considering the size of the industry in this country at least, many people have worked across a number of outlets and generally understand the graft than goes on, even on the most frivolous red tops.

I guess I had assumed this forum might be the one refuge wjere hacks could go to be spared having to read various papers compared to toilet paper etc but reading some of the other threads it appears not!

Hacks spend much of their time comparing papers, even those they work on, to toilet paper. They're all aware of how low the media has had to sink to get the revenue to pay their wages.

Were you expecting some form of love-in forum?

reason vs religion

jmcc wrote: »

What a wonderfully funny observation. Oh, wait! You are serious?

Regards...jmcc

You're one of the mindless critics referred to in the OP, your regard for your own opinions completely our of step with their worth.

dohboy

L1011 wrote:

Were you expecting some form of love-in forum?

No, just maybe a bit more acknowledgement of the decent work that does go on in the industry here, the fact the there still are hard working hacks, subs, even editors trying to put out the best product they can on a daily basis. The fact that yeah sales are sliding, the media is getting more fragmented, and ever more precarious, but there are lots and lots of people who are still buying papers, consuming media, and are fans of the product.

Repeatedly running down the media is done as nauseum elsewhere, I would hope to think this place might at least present the other side of the argument at bit more.

jmcc

reason vs religion wrote: »

You're one of the mindless critics referred to in the OP, your regard for your own opinions completely our of step with their worth.

I've been a writer and a journalist for a long time and just don't share your happy-clappy view of the IT. It is a small, provincial newspaper in a quickly changing market. It shifted away from real journalism towards commentary in the 1990s, just when the world wide web was getting started. This was because commentary was cheap and real journalism -- the stuff that involves going out, talking to people and getting the story -- was expensive. Then it set up a website that lost millions of Punts/Euro a year, tried to implement a paywall to get people to subscribe using people who didn't understand PPV or the Web. It failed. In that time it also lost out on millions of Euro of online advertising revenue. It also handed over the Irish online news market to RTE, the Irish Independent and the irish Examiner.

The IT then sold/leased a category-killer domain name (ireland.com) because the management wanted to be like the New York Times and have a .com website. But that didn't stop the same PPV/subscription mistakes being repeated with the latest subscription effort. It spent almost 52 million Euro on a property website at the height of a property bubble which promptly burst.

The sales figures for the IT have been continually declining and are heading for the 70K mark. The Irish Times used to be an important newspaper. Times have changed and the IT hasn't. It depends on a kind of Smuggerati demographic to continue buying it each day because it makes them feel that they are important people because they read the Irish Times and not the Independent or the Sun. As it continues to lose readers, it is likely to engage in more clickbait journalism and more churnalism (press releases with a by-line) but it will still have the same clueless and institutionalised commentators telling you what to think. Perhaps the Irish Times management has identified the key demographic that it needs for survival. There will always be people unaware of their own low intellect who want to be told what to think and, at the same time, think that they are better than everyone else because they read the Irish Times. Enjoy!

Regards...jmcc

reason vs religion

jmcc wrote: »

I've been a writer and a journalist for a long time and just don't share your happy-clappy view of the IT. It is a small, provincial newspaper in a quickly changing market. It shifted away from real journalism towards commentary in the 1990s, just when the world wide web was getting started. This was because commentary was cheap and real journalism -- the stuff that involves going out, talking to people and getting the story -- was expensive. Then it set up a website that lost millions of Punts/Euro a year, tried to implement a paywall to get people to subscribe using people who didn't understand PPV or the Web. It failed. In that time it also lost out on millions of Euro of online advertising revenue. It also handed over the Irish online news market to RTE, the Irish Independent and the irish Examiner.

The IT then sold/leased a category-killer domain name (ireland.com) because the management wanted to be like the New York Times and have a .com website. But that didn't stop the same PPV/subscription mistakes being repeated with the latest subscription effort. It spent almost 52 million Euro on a property website at the height of a property bubble which promptly burst.

The sales figures for the IT have been continually declining and are heading for the 70K mark. The Irish Times used to be an important newspaper. Times have changed and the IT hasn't. It depends on a kind of Smuggerati demographic to continue buying it each day because it makes them feel that they are important people because they read the Irish Times and not the Independent or the Sun. As it continues to lose readers, it is likely to engage in more clickbait journalism and more churnalism (press releases with a by-line) but it will still have the same clueless and institutionalised commentators telling you what to think. Perhaps the Irish Times management has identified the key demographic that it needs for survival. There will always be people unaware of their own low intellect who want to be told what to think and, at the same time, think that they are better than everyone else because they read the Irish Times. Enjoy!

Regards...jmcc

Your resentment for the paper is clearly clouding your judgment. Their failures with implementation of web strategy (despite being one of the first newspapers worldwide to put their content online) and various business side-projects shouldn't come into consideration when evaluating the actual copy. Likewise, a declining circulation is no indication of quality.

The accusation that IT commentators are smug and uniformly liberal is not corroborated, at least in my informed opinion, by a perusal of the comment pages. There are one or two, I accept, who fit that mould, but are counteracted by others (admittedly in a minortiy) such as Breda O'Brien. The accusation about investigative reporting holds more weight, and I'd like for them to do far more data journalism. But this is, surely in large part, a consequence of ever declining revenues. Yet, despite this, it maintains correspondents in London, Washington, Brussells, and serval others, (Indo has none), its culture section on Saturdays is genuinely excellent, its political reporting is generally balanced and analytic (if you dispute this, you need only contrast coverage of Sinn Feinn with the Indo's) and has a reserve in reporting that is utterly absent from INM titles, which now mix news and comment in the same throughout the paper. I recall you being a frequent critic of their tech coverage. That may be valid, but it's not of concern to me.

jmcc

reason vs religion wrote: »

Your resentment for the paper is clearly clouding your judgment.

Nope.

Their failures with implementation of web strategy (despite being one of the first newspapers worldwide to put their content online) and various business side-projects shouldn't come into consideration when evaluating the actual copy.

You probaby weren't around for all of this and don't understand how the management of a newspaper has a major effect on all aspects of the newspaper.

Likewise, a declining circulation is no indication of quality.

Actually it is. If the quality is as good as you think, then it should be able to hold its readership. It is not. Because it became so dependent on commentary in the last few decades, it was badly positioned when the web provided everyone with the ability to publish their own comments and opinions. Thus the Irish Times, and other newspapers, have been playing Social Media catch-up over the last few years by introducing reader comments on their articles. The web also allowed the fragmentation of specialisations where people could read the opinions of experts rather than churnalists. Thus there was a shift away from the "specialist" areas of newspapers towards specialist websites and coverage.

The accusation that IT commentators are smug and uniformly liberal is not corroborated, at least in my informed opinion,

Nobody really cares about your opinion, informed or otherwise. What matters is what sells. And I didn't mention "liberals" or "conservatives". Readers, particularly IT readers, all seem to consider themselves informed but they aren't really. Professionals concern themselves with readership, circulation and revenue. It is similar to that expression attributed to Rommel (and others): Amateurs talk tactics. Professionals talk logistics.

by a perusal of the comment pages.

Who cares about "comment pages"? The thing about print editions is that nobody really knows the readership figures for the comment pages. If you use online comments as a metric, then some of the IT's commentary articles get no reader comments. Could this be because they are boring and they get very few readers? You may not understand this, or if you are doing some media studies course then you haven't got to the relevant module yet, but the web changed the publishing model from a push-model (where the reader had to buy the whole newspaper) to a pull model where the reader decides what to read and does not have to buy the whole newspaper to read it. That's an inversion of a power structure.

There are one or two, I accept, who fit that mould, but are counteracted by others (admittedly in a minortiy) such as Breda O'Brien.

An addition to a newspaper that wanted to gain sales in the conservative fundamentalist school teacher demographic?

The accusation about investigative reporting holds more weight, and I'd like for them to do far more data journalism.

It is not an accusation. It is a statement of fact. Real investigative journalism is expensive because it can take weeks or months before a story is ready to publish and then there's always a chance that the lawyers will want to spike it.

As for data journalism, that's kind of difficult to do without a background in the subject under examination and an ability to use a computer, combine data sources, extract information and analyse. Most journalists in the Irish media do not have those abilities. The production line drones being churned out by journalism courses generally don't. The Arts graduates (most journalists are from Arts backgrounds rather than STEM backgrounds) don't. And there's the problem of the data not being available.

But this is, surely in large part, a consequence of ever declining revenues.

The reason that revenues are declining is because people don't buy the newspapers. Once people don't buy the newspapers, the advertisers don't want to waste money advertising to a non-existent readership where they can't measure the effectiveness of the advertising. It is far better to use Google's PPC advertising where it is only necessary to pay when someone clicks on the advertisement.

Yet, despite this, it maintains correspondents in London, Washington, Brussells, and serval others,

I can see why that would impress some people. It is still a provincial newspaper with a miniscule, by international standards, circulation.

(Indo has none), its culture section on Saturdays is genuinely excellent,

That's the IT's version of a women's magazine combined with the Sunday version of the IT. It is intended to compete with the Sunday Times and the Sunday Independent.

its political reporting is generally balanced and analytic

Institutionalised and largely indistinguishable from the political parties themselves.

(if you dispute this, you need only contrast coverage of Sinn Feinn with the Indo's) and has a reserve in reporting that is utterly absent from INM titles,

IN&M has always been anti-SF. After all, didn't that great Sinn Feiner, Michael Collins, once send people to threaten to burn down their pro-British operation?

which now mix news and comment in the same throughout the paper.

And what do you think that these "commentators" do for a living?

I recall you being a frequent critic of their tech coverage.

Yep. And, to paraphrase, apart from the wireservices/press releases, what's good is not original and what's original is not good.

That may be valid, but it's not of concern to me.

You were the one who brought up their "tech" section. The only reason that it is still there is because it brings in advertising.

You may think of yourself as a valued reader of the Irish Times but you are just another person who thinks that in buying the IT you are better than someone who buys the Indo or the Sun. Most people in the business are far more cynical and realistic about the business than the people outside it. They know that they could be out of a job when their publication folds. But at least people like you give everyone in the business hope that there's someone, somewhere willing to pay for the latest wibbling from the Commentariat and recycled press releases (and perhaps even a bit of news to pad out of the space between advertising). You do buy the Irish Times each day, don't you?

Regards...jmcc

dohboy

Ok, I think I've learned that the answer to my original question is 'Yes'.

And then some.

reason vs religion

jmcc wrote: »

Nope.

You probaby weren't around for all of this and don't understand how the management of a newspaper has a major effect on all aspects of the newspaper.

Actually it is. If they quality is as good as you think, then it should be able to hold its readership. It is not. Because it became so dependent on commentary in the last few decades, it was badly positioned when the web provided everyone with the ability to publish their own comments and opinions. Thus the Irish Times, and other newspapers, have been playing Social Media catch-up over the last few years by introducing reader comments on their articles. The web also allowed the fragmentation of specialisations where people could read the opinions of experts rather than churnalists. Thus there was a shift away from the "specialist" areas of newspapers towards specialist websites and coverage.

Nobody really cares about your opinion, informed or otherwise. What matters is what sells. And I didn't mention "liberals" or "conservatives". Readers, particularly IT readers, all seem to consider themselves informed but they aren't really. Professionals concern themselves with readership, circulation and revenue. It is similar to that expression attributed to Rommel (and others): Amateurs talk tactics. Professionals talk logistics.

Who cares about "comment pages"? The thing about print editions is that nobody really knows the readership figures for the comment pages. If you use online comments as a metric, then some of the IT's commentary articles get no reader comments. Could this be because they are boring and they get very few readers? You may not understand this, or if you are doing some media studies course then you haven't got to the relevant module yet, but the web changed the publishing model from a push-model (where the reader had to buy the whole newspaper) to a pull model where the reader decides what to read and does not have to buy the whole newspaper to read it. That's an inversion of a power structure.

An addition to a newspaper that wanted to gain sales in the conservative fundamentalist school teacher demographic?

It is not an accusation. It is a statement of fact. Real investigative journalism is expensive because it can take weeks or months before a story is ready to publish and then there's always a chance that the lawyers will want to spike it.

As for data journalism, that's kind of difficult to do without a background in the subject under examination and an ability to use a computer, combine data sources, extract information and analyse. Most journalists in the Irish media do not have those abilities. The production line drones being churned out by journalism courses generally don't. The Arts graduates (most journalists are from Arts backgrounds rather than STEM backgrounds) don't. And there's the problem of the data not being available.

The reason that revenues are declining is because people don't buy the newspapers. Once people don't buy the newspapers, the advertisers don't want to waste money advertising to a non-existent readership where they can't measure the effectiveness of the advertising. It is far better to use Google's PPC advertising where it is only necessary to pay when someone clicks on the advertisement.

I can see why that would impress some people. It is still a provincial newspaper with a miniscule, by international standards, circulation.

That's the IT's version of a women's magazine combined with the Sunday version of the IT. It is intended to compete with the Sunday Times and the Sunday Independent.

Institutionalised and largely indistinguishable from the political parties themselves.

IN&M has always been anti-SF. After all, didn't that great Sinn Feiner, Michael Collins, once send people to threaten to burn down their pro-British operation?

And what do you think that these "commentators" do for a living?

Yep. And, to paraphrase, apart from the wireservices/press releases, what's good is not original and what's original is not good.

You were the one who brought up their "tech" section. The only reason that it is still there is because it brings in advertising.

You may think of yourself as a valued reader of the Irish Times but you are just another person who thinks that in buying the IT you are better than someone who buys the Indo or the Sun. Most people in the business are far more cynical and realistic about the business than the people outside it. They know that they could be out of a job when their publication folds. But at least people like you give everyone in the business hope that there's someone, somewhere willing to pay for the latest wibbling from the Commentariat and recycled press releases (and perhaps even a bit of news to pad out of the space between advertising). You do buy the Irish Times each day, don't you?

Regards...jmcc

Well, fair play on word count, at least. But I think most of my original points stand up to the barrage without further comment from me. One exception is where I misapprehended in your original post that it was the actual printed commentators, not readers, who were smug. That generalisation would seem to me still to be wrong, but I don't really care either way.

You have misjudged me. I'm a student and only ever very sporadically buy a newspaper. Most of the news and opinion I read is from foreign outlets, but whenever I become interested in some Irish news story and seek out coverage of it, the consistent quality of the IT is noticeable.

L1011

dohboy wrote: »

No, just maybe a bit more acknowledgement of the decent work that does go on in the industry here, the fact the there still are hard working hacks, subs, even editors trying to put out the best product they can on a daily basis. The fact that yeah sales are sliding, the media is getting more fragmented, and ever more precarious, but there are lots and lots of people who are still buying papers, consuming media, and are fans of the product.

Repeatedly running down the media is done as nauseum elsewhere, I would hope to think this place might at least present the other side of the argument at bit more.

You say "no" but the rest of your answer means "yes".

dohboy

L1011 wrote:

You say "no" but the rest of your answer means "yes".

****ing hell. And you're a mod here? No wonder the place is dead.

Grand so, I got my answer. I'll piss off.

L1011

dohboy wrote: »

****ing hell. And you're a mod here? No wonder the place is dead.

Grand so, I got my answer. I'll piss off.

I'm not a mod on this forum.

Nobody is preventing you from posting threads of the type you want. The forum has always been open for them. If the other side of the argument is not being presented it is because nobody is doing it, not because of a ban on it.