“Yes, we will need to lose some people and will try to do it in a voluntary way,” [Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger] told BBC Radio. “We will need to lose significant numbers but we don’t need to do it tomorrow. We can do it over the next couple of years and have a civilized conversation about that.”
He said the company needs “to reduce the cost base” in order to hire more digital developers, as it has watched its print advertising revenue recede.
The collective intelligence of the Internet’s two billion users, and the digital fingerprints that so many users leave on Web sites, combine to make it more and more likely that every embarrassing video, every intimate photo, and every indelicate e-mail is attributed to its source, whether that source wants it to be or not. This intelligence makes the public sphere more public than ever before and sometimes forces personal lives into public view.
In a nutshell, Arrington claims he had a scoop that Caterina Fake was launching yet another startup, and reached out to her. But before he could publish, she spilled the beans on her own blog. This led Arrington to write an angry post, and in doing so dish dirt he’d apparently been sitting on as to what he claims is the real reason Caterina Fake left Hunch
Because making a blockbuster movie is expensive, people assume that it is a scale business—that is, the bigger you are, the more cheaply you can produce something. But the defining characteristic of scale is high fixed costs that can be spread most efficiently by the largest player. Moviemaking is not this kind of business. The cost of a blockbuster does not vary based on the size of the studio producing it. Creating hit-driven content in any medium does not require significant fixed costs. Some series-based or other kinds of continuously produced content may have a larger fixed-cost component, but they are the exception, not the rule. Aggregation, on the other hand, by its nature requires a large fixed-cost infrastructure to collect, manage, market, and redistribute content. This is why a cable channel with 20 million subscribers loses money but an identical one with 100 million subscribers might have 50 percent margins.
The first thing Lascarides says to me is, “Digital is becoming the horseless of our age.” He’s referring to the late nineteenth century time that produced publications like, “Horseless Age,” the Wired of the early automobile era. His point is that the word “digital” is becoming unnecessary because “digital is woven into everything.” You add the adjective when you need to differentiate it from the world’s general expectations. After automobiles dominated the landscape, horselessness was assumed. Indeed, we all live in the horseless age, but very few of us feel the need to draw attention to that fact.
For my latest article on Harvard’s Nieman Lab, I interviewed Meredith Artley, the managing editor of CNN.com, about why CNN dominates its cable news competitors — and virtually ever other news source — on the web:
Why does CNN trounce all its competitors on the web? AdWeek took a stab at this question a year ago, suggesting that it might have to do with the demographics of CNN viewers and the idea that Fox News’ brand of opinionated journalism doesn’t automatically work well on the web. “People shouting at each other doesn’t translate to a mass audience online,” a source told AdWeek’s Mike Shields. But Meredith Artley, the managing editor of CNN.com, told me in a phone interview that the network owes its online success to what she calls the “Pilates strategy.”
“What that means, as someone who has friends who do Pilates but has never done it herself, is that it’s about strengthening your core and stretching into new areas,” she said.
The core, as she sees it, is breaking news. “But that’s not enough; you can’t do just that alone. You have to go beyond that. To that end, you have to stretch into new areas and try new things and innovate and play and experiment.”