'The Age' and 'On Line Opinion'

This makes the news less valuable, and newspapers more reliant on advertising, because fewer people are prepared to pay the cover price. At the same time the market becomes less attractive to advertisers, damaging their other source of revenue.

The advent of the Internet, where there is no cover-price, has exacerbated this trend.

Neither of the stories should have been news, but in this desperate downwards spiral today’s fish and chip wrapping is starting to resemble tomorrow’s news.

Added to that The Age is in competition with us, even if their unique browsers dwarf ours. This issue was raised on Crikey. I don’t think it would have represented a strong financial incentive for publication, but it’s possible it was a consideration in the back of someone’s mind.

It is just as likely that as the publication shifts more and more towards the Internet that blogging habits are taking hold. It’s common for bloggers to ignore the ethical niceties, pass off others’ work as their own, and scream out loud accusations of bias and incompetence against their rivals and the MSM.

All of which paints a dire picture for serious political analysis in this country which is almost entirely conducted in print. Unless newspapers work out how to produce nourishment rather than caffeine hits, news is going to become less valuable to readers, less valuable to advertisers, and therefore less valuable to shareholders.

Perhaps someone in Fairfax could give me a ring? Not about the article but about their business model. I’ve got some ideas for how they can reverse their slide. Or email will do.