DISQUS

Journalism isn't broken -- but newspapering (and to a lesser degree, magazine publishing) is. To save journalism(1), we need to do a couple of things:

* We must figure out how to create profitable, sustainable business models at existing publications; and/or

* We must find new models -- likely centered around domain competency (see: Politico.com) rather than geographic hubs -- that let good journalism thrive.

Lots of ways to do both -- rather than rattle them off, let's see if the discussion gets any traction.

Mind you, I'm biased -- my company provides outsourced services to newspapers and other publications, and I'm sure that we're vilified in some circles, even as we help lower costs, increase revenue and free up the newsroom to focus on unique local journalism.

(1.) Footnote: I think reasonable people can disagree on whether journalism, both as a career and as a production process at many newspapers, *should* be saved. But that's probably another debate entirely.

A McKinsey study found that most people produce user-generated content for fame, fun and a sense of community -- in the study's findings, the potential to accrue perks at work (for intranets) or money (for intranets or external user-content-driven sites) served as a minimal motivator.

Mind you, that can shift based on market conditions -- if a critical mass of top sites start paying, then it will become mainstream. But it's not the main thing people seem to be looking for at this time.

I'd chalk it up to an aggressive member of the sales force - or even aggressive sales management - long before I'd look to a political motive. It's a lot less "don't be evil" and more "don't be clueless."

Salespeople are always viewing the world through a very tactical, very can-I-make-my-numbers-this-month lens -- where nearly everyone else saw controversy, they (or just Lauren, who authored the post) saw a chance to make some money off of Big Health(tm).

I worked at Reason (the foundation, not just the magazine) in the early '90s and gotta say: I miss Virginia's editing polish and her greater emphasis on policy and economics.

It was, at the time, a magazine of sharper writing than TNR, of more real-world ideas than National Review and of less muttering-in-our-privatized-coffee essays than what you'd find in Liberty.

Virginia once said Reason was the only think magazine who's editors openly admitted to watching prime-time TV. In some ways, Nick's evolution of the magazine is that meme carried to extreme.