Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alison Dagnes's avatar

I agree with all of this. And just want to add that when these legacy institutions fold like an origami swan, the public loses a trusted source of information AND access to actual news.

Yes, we now have access to these former WaPo (and NBC/ CBS, etc.) journalists on Substack, but most are forced to move into commentary. It's the journalism that's missing, because journalism is expensive to produce, time consuming, and generally involves more than just one intrepid reporter acting solo. The "independent journalists" I subscribe to are tremendous writers and I value their analysis. But they (generally, with a few notable exceptions) aren't breaking news by delivering scoops, etc. Maybe I'm especially cranky because the Post was my hometown paper for 50 years (I'm including my parents' subscriptions growing up in DC). It all just seems dangerous.

A.J. Fish's avatar

Bezos months ago leaked that he wanted to expand the subscriber base by an obscene multiple. This effort was bound to fail. Though he didn't have to be so vulgar in cutting back: https://x.com/lizziejohnsonnn/status/2019083204133609846 "I was just laid off by The Washington Post in the middle of a warzone. I have no words. I'm devastated."

Think of the news consumer. The best news product in the S.F. Bay Area right now is oddly, one that got a bad rap by the pre-internet legacy journalists : the East Bay Times/S.J. Mercury News/Marin I.J. It (the physical product) has a great page two, has just enough local news, curated wire stories to fill in national, arts reviews and has finishability with puzzles and comics to habituate young readers for a lifetime habit. Yesterday's edition even had poetry by state youth laureates.

But few people get the physical product. We need to acknowledge online news consumption is rarely a premium experience.

2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?