7 thoughts on “This Isn’t The Worst Idea I’ve Ever Heard

  1. I’ll grant you that it is an interesting idea which should be explored. The opportunities for partnering seem huge.
    I guess my first question is that isn’t the trend on college newspapers to become subsidiaries of the so-called professional newspapers?
    Of course, I am outraged at this trend. So changing it wouldn’t upset me in the least.

  2. MapleStreet, subsidiaries is the nice term for it. Yeah, that’s the trend. Why have student journalism be a form of education when it can be a way to make money instead? I mean, come on!

  3. Its a great idea. I’ve been wanting a more academic (read: balanced, informed) slant to media for a long time. Why not just let the academics run the papers? What would the downside of such a system? Conservatives would hate on the profs via the internet? Fox news and other corporate media on tv would rail against it? Would it decrease attendance to colleges (as a backlash to the ‘liberal’ faculty)? I’m really trying to think of possible/probable negatives.

  4. I love it! Merge two of the institutions most hated by conservatives! More hating–less waiting!
    Srsly, I agree–there has to be a change in the way that the big newspapers operate. I’ve said before here that the non-profit style of newspaper (see VoiceofSanDiego.org) is already changing the way local news works. Why not use that approach with the national newspapers? The thing that’s driving the slashing of newsroom staff isn’t the competition from Craigslist, it’s the overwhelming demand from stockholders for ridiculously high profit margins. If you could get expectations for profits down to a reasonable level, I believe most of the big newspapers could operate quite well, and could also make the transition to the online world more effectively.
    Having the universities take over the Times could accomplish just that.

Comments are closed.