
At The Washington Post, Jeff Bezos has the paper thinking global domination - danso
http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/washington_post_jeff_bezos.php?page=all
======
hooande
This was a fascinating look not only into the modern newsroom, but into the
mind of Jeff Bezos:

 _The origin of many of the hires could be traced to a phrase Bezos had used
several times during his visit to the Post in September, when he said that the
newsroom needed to "take advantage of the gifts the internet gives us." _

_...explaining that he was comfortable simultaneously running a secretive
company and owning a newspaper, because he believed that "powerful minds can
contain powerful inconsistencies."_

 _" All businesses need to be young forever. If your customer base ages with
you, you’re Woolworth’s"_

This guys is full of gems. I'm not sure if that insight will be enough to save
the Washington Post. It doesn't seem like any number of gadgets and no
reasonable amount of money will be enough to save the newspaper industry. Jeff
Bezos is one of the few people who could do it, but it's not clear whether
he's fully committed to the challenge. I'll miss newspapers, but I bet they'll
be replaced by something cooler.

~~~
joshlegs
So, disclaimer. Journalist turned web developer here. But I really don't think
newspapers are going to go extinct, really ever. They are one of the only
_permanent_ records of history. Digital publications disappear like
yesterday's rainclouds. There will always -- _always_ \-- be demand for
physical products, because as humans we are very tactile. I think one of the
root problems is in the quality of the journalism. Experienced journalists
aren't staying in the game because there's no money in it. The ones who do
stay in it are one of three things: crazy, passionate about the job despite
the compensation, or not dependent on the income. There's a very limited group
that can make it.

Add in the fact that there's an extraordinary amount of pressure on
journalists to produce unrealistic product goals and you've got a recipe for a
mass exodus, paving the way for a decline in the industry.

Next, consider that you've really never paid for news. You've always paid for
the advertisements in the newspaper. That's the business model journalism is
built on. So people don't want to pay for something they've historically not
paid for.

So what you're seeing now are a bunch of experiments in journalism business
models. After a while, you'll find several that really work. In fact, I think
there are several that show promise now. The only problem is you need someone
with the financial ability, vision and appreciation for the work to back the
industry, and I think Bezos has those things.

The bottom line is that there is always going to be a demand for newspapers
and news in general. In fact, people have been predicting the demise of the
newspaper since TV was invented. But the bottom line is that newspapers just
fill too many roles for them to ever become obsolete. Also, I need lining for
my bird cage, so I'm gonna go grab a paper now.

~~~
coldtea
> _So, disclaimer. Journalist turned web developer here. But I really don 't
> think newspapers are going to go extinct, really ever._

Still, particular newspapers have already gone extinct by the hundrends, and
the trend is not showing any signs of reversing.

> _They are one of the only permanent records of history. Digital publications
> disappear like yesterday 's rainclouds._

Sure, but it's not like people, the average consumer etc, appreciates that
fact or gives a damn about "permanently recording history". Most of them don't
even print their digital photos, maybe 5-10 of the best ones, whereas they
used to have albums with 100s of family photos back in the day. (And most
don't even backup their digital photos).

That newspapers served as "permanent records of history" was a byproduct of
them being available, dominant and profitable. Not something people
specifically bought them and subsidized them for.

> _There will always -- always -- be demand for physical products, because as
> humans we are very tactile._

Well, tablets are quite tactile too. And people have quit CDs and vinyl for
mp3s and digital downloads/piracy.

Sure, there's still vinyl pressed. But it's small quantities and is consumed
without any wider cultural context in the society, just by a tiny niche of
music fans. And pressing vinyl is a $1000 affair -- so you can afford to press
300 copies for stores etc, where running a newspaper is extremely costly, and
a print edition even more so. So the difficulty of continuing one is not the
same as continuing the other (vinyl) niche tradition.

> _The bottom line is that there is always going to be a demand for newspapers
> and news in general. In fact, people have been predicting the demise of the
> newspaper since TV was invented._

That's a common logical error. The belief that if people have been making the
same prediction that didn't pan out, it will never pan out.

Not to mention: who said it didn't pan out? When radio/TV was invented,
newspapers might not have vanished, but they lost a lot of their cachet as THE
source of news and information.

The loss in readers was ofset by an increase in education and thus an increase
in a middle class wanting to read newspapers. But that was a historical
accident. The spread of the internet didn't see any such simultaneous increase
of middle class or literacy (probably because they had already hit a ceiling
during the seventies).

And TV, back in the day, had limited chanels and was live only. So not much of
competition for the newspaper. Nowadays we have 200+ channel options, 24-hour
news channels, Tivo and its ilk, and video on demand from the internet. Plus,
written news on demand from the internet.

Plus, the numbers (of declining readership) are very different (and much
worse) in the internet age vs the tv age.

~~~
joshlegs
Oh, I'm definitely not saying newspapers are hunky-dory. They obviously have
plenty of challenges to overcome, and you're correct in that a whole slew of
newspapers have shuttered their doors, and practically all have employed
layoffs to combat declining revenues.

But the simple fact is that newspapers provide a valuable service and product.
There just needs to be a change in business model, and there are lots of
places trying new ones out. In many places, they're succeeding. Some have even
reversed the downward spiral and moved back into profitable territory.

------
graycat
Okay, I read the OP and decided to give 'The Washington Post' another chance.

So, I started reading an article there. It made a claim but gave no data or
references. So, the article failed standard high school term paper writing
standards. So the 'content' was not solid information but something else.
Tilt.

So, apparently The Washington Post is still the same old 'journalism' I've
screamed about for years. So, for me, done.

If the 'new' Washington Post is just more of the same of old 'journalism',
then I see no great reason Bezos should work to spread it around the US or the
world instead of just inside the DC beltway.

So, for me, Bezos wasted his money. Sorry, Jeff.

------
hodgesmr
I was originally very excited by the Bezos takeover. As the article states,
though, not much has changed from a journalistic perspective... yet. I'd love
to see the Post become a contender of outside-the-Beltway content. When Ezra
Klein bailed to start Vox, I found myself reading the Post less and less. If
nothing else, this article makes me think that _soon_ something exciting
_might_ come to the Post.

------
omilu
there is a crazy yin/yang quality to bezo's face that makes him look
simultaneously like a crazed diabolical genius and a thoughtful zen master at
peace with himself and the universe. The right side of the portrait being the
diabolical part.

~~~
MaysonL
Almost looks like he's had a stroke – if Steve Jobs could keep his cancer and
liver transplant secret for a while, how long could Bezos? Doing a Google
image search, there definitely seems to have been a significant change,
sometime after the original Kindle intro.

------
cafard
The changes if any are not obvious. I say that as somebody who scanned the
print version over breakfast today.

~~~
gboone42
All I've noticed is more clickbait.
[http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/](http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/)

~~~
highwind
Know More is a pre-Bezos product. Bezos took over on 10/1 and know more was
launched on 10/7\. Meaning planning and development on Know More must've
started before Bezos' control.

------
devbug
I wonder if this is Bezos doing what he normally does, vertically integrating
--Amazon Newspapers?

~~~
JTon
I was under the impression that this was Jeff's own side-project and he had no
intention of integration with Amazon

------
11thEarlOfMar
Obviously, The Post will be delivered by Amazon drones.

