Macrowikinomics: Journalism in the Age of Collaboration

[Commentary] The new media is threatening journalism. The continuing collapse of many newspapers in North America -- 70 in the past decade -- is a storm warning of more to come. Magazines are in trouble, too, and your favorite has probably never had such a dearth of advertising. It turns out people will not pay for news as a commodity. In an age of Twitter, bloggers, WikiLeaks and social networks, people can find the news without buying a paper. As one youngster said, "If the news is important it will find me."

The Internet has destroyed the business model for print. Print publications will survive, but not in the long term, and this has big implications for journalism. Compared to the massive physical assets of, say, The New York Times, online newspaper The Huffington Post has almost zero printing and distribution costs. The New York Times employs more than a thousand people in its editorial department alone. The Huffington Post employs 97 and a volunteer roster of thousands of writers. The site is thriving, with 20 million readers. But how will we defend core journalistic values like objectivity, quality and truth? How will journalists make a living? What will happen to quality in this democratized world when the traditional filters for accuracy, balance and journalistic standards are gone? Will investigative journalists who are losing their jobs be replaced in society by public-relations flacks? With no one seemingly accountable for the truth, who can we trust? Journalism will surely survive, just not in its present form. People will not pay for commodities, whether it's news or other content. But they will pay for compelling, differentiated value, as The Economist, Thomson Reuters, and In-Style Magazine show. The key will be to develop new business models, offer distinctive value and not get too hung up on trying to defend a legacy business being killed by the digital age.