Rupert Murdoch has a column in today's Wall Street Journal that raises interesting points about the structure of news businesses, charging for content, and the pros and cons of government involvement in media regulation and subsidization. But there is one little paragraph that struck me especially:
First, media companies need to give people the news they want. I can't tell you how many papers I have visited where they have a wall of journalism prizes—and a rapidly declining circulation. This tells me the editors are producing news for themselves—instead of news that is relevant to their customers. A news organization's most important asset is the trust it has with its readers, a bond that reflects the readers' confidence that editors are looking out for their needs and interests.
Although I see his point, I worry about what constitutes the news people want, especially in the opinion of a man whose varied media interests include the tabloid-ish
New York Post, the biased
Fox News Channel and
Fox Broadcasting Co., which has been known for quality programming such as "Temptation Island."
Of course, Murdoch's
News Corp. has plenty of quality in the offing, too, by way of the Wall Street Journal and shows like "The Simpsons" and "House." But if what people want as news is every sordid detail of Tiger Woods' personal life as opposed to every detail of the Obama administration's plan for Afghanistan, I do worry about the future of the American brain.
As in the marriage of smut and decency found in News Corp.'s products, there must be a way to merge the two in a healthy way for news organizations. If only I knew how to do it...