by Mike Masnick
Mon, Aug 24th 2009 11:28pm
One of the common refrains from folks in the newspaper industry is that, despite their inability to react to the changing market in front of them, they need to be kept alive, because of their civic duty of serving the public and preserving democracy. At least that's how the argument goes. However, Steve Yelvington points us to a good point made by Rick Edmonds, noting that if it's so important for the newspapers to serve the public, doesn't it make it much harder for them to do that behind a paywall. In other words, in their zeal to lock up the content, they're proving that they don't mean what they say when they talk about just serving the public. They really only mean that they're serving the segment of the public willing to pay -- which doesn't quite have that same noble civic duty feel to it, now does it?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Judge Blocks Release Of Anti-Abortion Videos As The Arbiter Of Journalism
- Direct Democracy: Successful Petition Gives Swiss Citizens Chance To Vote Against New Surveillance Law
- South Carolina Politicians Propose Ridculous Plan To Register Journalists... To Make A Statement About Gun Control
- UK Appeals Court Says UK Terrorism Act's Detention Clause Violates Press Freedoms
- GQ And Forbes Go After Ad Blocker Users Rather Than Their Own Shitty Advertising Inventory