{"id":258919,"date":"2014-02-13T11:32:00","date_gmt":"2014-02-13T16:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/?p=258919"},"modified":"2024-01-28T11:32:55","modified_gmt":"2024-01-28T16:32:55","slug":"is-marc-andreessen-right-about-what-is-holding-the-media-industry-back-mostly-yes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/2014\/02\/13\/is-marc-andreessen-right-about-what-is-holding-the-media-industry-back-mostly-yes\/","title":{"rendered":"Is Marc Andreessen right about what is holding the media industry back? Mostly, yes"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Venture investor Marc Andreessen of Andreessen Horowitz doesn\u2019t have many media investments, apart from small stakes in sites like Pando Daily, Talking Points Memo and RapGenius \u2014 but that hasn\u2019t stopped him from holding forth on Twitter<\/a> about his views on the industry, a process that includes an often passionate back-and-forth with critics of his views. In the latest instalment<\/a> of this manifesto, Andreessen looked at what he believes is holding the existing media industry back.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the first part of the series, the former Netscape Communications co-founder talked about why he is fundamentally optimistic<\/a> about the future of journalism (although perhaps not the future of traditional media entities). In the second part he talked about ways that new media entities can make money online<\/a>, and in the third he gave some examples of companies that he thinks are doing it well \u2014 including VICE Media, The Atlantic<\/em> and Wirecutter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Part 4: Things & ideas in journalism business, probably\/arguably counterproductive to twin growth of quality journalism + quality business.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) February 11, 2014<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Bloated cost structure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

On Tuesday, Andreessen listed off some of the reasons<\/a> why he thinks most traditional media companies have not been able to make the transition from print to digital, or at least not as smoothly as they might have. First on the list<\/a>: \u201cBloated cost structure left over from monopoly\/oligopoly days. Nobody promised shiny HQ tower, big expense accounts, lots of secretaries!\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judge\u2019s ruling<\/strong>: This one might seem a little unfair, since hardly anyone has a shiny headquarters (most have sold them and moved to much less impressive digs) or lots of secretaries. But the part about a bloated cost structure is arguably still true, even after waves of layoffs \u2014 and a big part of that cost structure is things like pensions, which Andreessen mentions in his next post:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

2 Unions & Pensions: Useful once, but now impose structural rigidity in rapidly changing environment. Everyone with equity = better model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) February 11, 2014<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Staying married to objectivity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Next, Andreessen mentions the principle of objectivity, which he says is<\/a> \u201cstill relevant for some, but broad journalism opportunity includes many variations of subjectivity.\u201d In the days before World War II, Andreessen argues, subjectivity was the dominant model for newspapers \u2014 as he describes it<\/a>, \u201clots of points of view battling it out in marketplace of ideas.\u201d Objectivity as a guiding principle for all media, he argues, was \u201can artifact of new monopoly\/oligopoly structures; necessary to ward off antitrust; embraced by reporters.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The VC added in follow-up<\/a> tweets that \u201cmany stories don\u2019t have two sides; describing with point of view can even be better\u201d \u2014 a comment that echoes journalism professor Jay Rosen\u2019s repeated criticism of false balance, or what he calls The View From Nowhere. David Weinberger of Harvard\u2019s Berkman Center for Internet and Society has argued that<\/a> \u201ctransparency is the new objectivity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judge\u2019s ruling<\/strong>: Andreessen is right when he says that objectivity, often held up as an inviolable tenet of journalism, is a relatively recent invention. Early newspapers were incredibly lop-sided in their political and social viewpoints, since many of them were owned by rich proprietors who had an agenda they wanted to promote. The risk, of course, is that not everyone will read every perspective, which could leave some with a distorted picture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Chinese wall and too much defense<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Next, Andreessen mentions<\/a> the \u201cChinese wall\u201d that many media entities maintain between the business side and the editorial side. This approach is flawed, he says: \u201cNo other non-monopoly industry lets product creators off the hook on how the business works.\u201d Many businesses, Andreessen argues<\/a>, manage to balance incentives and conflicts and can still \u201chold the line on quality.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

There are intermediate points between “holier than holy” and “hopelessly corrupt” that don’t equal warped coverage and do work as business.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) February 11, 2014<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The venture capitalist then accuses media outlets of spending most<\/a> of their time and effort on \u201cplaying defense and protecting the old\u201d as opposed to a strong offense or inventing the future. In the long run, he says, this approach leads to almost certain doom. Even newspapers that are now making a go of things in digital \u201cwould be much better off today if [they] had shifted resources\/focus harder\/sooner,\u201d Andreessen says<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judge\u2019s ruling<\/strong>: The division between business and editorial did serve a purpose in the old days of newspapers, in order to prevent the desires of advertisers infecting the purity of the journalism. But Andreessen is right that Chinese walls are expensive. As for his point about newspapers playing too much defense and not enough offense, he is 100 percent correct on that one, as Digital First Media CEO John Paton would no doubt agree<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Too much competition?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

His final point is that the industry in North America at least suffers from an excess of competition, in the sense that too many general news<\/a> organizations \u2014 from newspapers to TV networks \u2014 are chasing the same market. More than 15 full-scale national news entities in the U.S., he says, along with international players, \u201cconsolidation [is] required.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

NYT, WSJ, WP, LAT, CT, NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, NPR, Reuters, AP, CNN, Bloomberg, BBC, FT, Guardian, etc + all online co’s too many general orgs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) February 11, 2014<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Judge\u2019s ruling<\/strong>: Andreessen has a point that there are a lot of national and international news entities chasing the same group of readers or viewers \u2014 and there are a lot of new online startups entering the field as well. But would it be any better if those groups were consolidated so that one or two owners controlled TV networks and newspapers and radio stations, and their online equivalents? This is one area where I\u2019m not convinced. What\u2019s wrong with competition?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In his last point, which requires no judging, Andreessen notes that<\/a> these are all \u201cbusiness challenges\/opportunities that can be rethought, addressed, fixed\u201d if the industry wants to and puts its collective mind to it. And he closes with a quote from<\/a> legendary baseball manager Tommy Lasorda: \u201cNobody said this f***ing job would be all that f***ing easy.\u201d But even though it is hard, the Netscape founder said, \u201cit can be done, and it is worth doing.\u201d Amen to that, sir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Post and thumbnail images courtesy of All Things Digital<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Venture investor Marc Andreessen of Andreessen Horowitz doesn\u2019t have many media investments, apart from small stakes in sites like Pando Daily, Talking Points Memo and RapGenius \u2014 but that hasn\u2019t stopped him from holding forth on Twitter about his views on the industry, a process that includes an often passionate back-and-forth with critics of his views. In the … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Is Marc Andreessen right about what is holding the media industry back? Mostly, yes”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_crsspst_to_mathewingramblogwordpresscom":true,"mf2_syndication":[],"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-258919","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gigaom"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258919","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=258919"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258919\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":258920,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258919\/revisions\/258920"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258919"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258919"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mathewingram.com\/work\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258919"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}