10 Thesen zur Zukunft von Zeitungen

Im Rahmen meiner Arbeit für Memonic beschäftige ich mich zur Zeit auch viel mit der Digitalisierungsthematik für Verlage. Hier (in Englisch) meine 10 Thesen zur Zukunft von Zeitungen.

Mehr in Englisch.

Über dselz

Husband, father, internet entrepreneur, founder, CEO, Squirro, Memonic, local.ch, Namics, rail aficionado, author, tbd...
Dieser Beitrag wurde unter Internet, Organizations, PracticalEconomics veröffentlicht. Setze ein Lesezeichen auf den Permalink.

3 Antworten zu 10 Thesen zur Zukunft von Zeitungen

  1. Till sagt:


    Very nice post and couldn’t agree more. Of course we think about similar stuff in relation to Paperboy, so I have done my share of thinking about the topic also and came to similar conclusions.

    1 through 5: 100% ack.

    Regarding focus on the topics a reader is interested in (point 6.): one of the main benefits of a “regular” newspaper or magazine I actually see in that it points me to stuff I did exactly not follow yet. There is also a “danger” that people lock-in too much on certain topics maybe. So I am always a bit unsure about this one. While some great recommendation and personalisation would be awesome, it should maybe always include some “surprises” or “random” stuff.

    To 9. and 10. I always wonder if this attention scarcity is really so new. In the last 50 years if you wanted you could access more information than you could handle in your life if you only wanted to. (Libraries etc.) And the information overflow currently affects only a certain group of people (yet). And there is already now a counter-trend, where some people decide to stop consuming news altogether (http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part1_TEXT.pdf).

    But definitely, journalists should focus on providing quality content. No matter which channel.

    What do you think?

  2. An excellent list, thank you very much!

    What do you think about the News+ concept

    which Bonnier developed?

    In terms of content, I always use Monocle (and their new radio programme: Monocle 24) as an example for excellent journalism, although (or maybe because) their digital strategy seems to be inexistant.

  3. dselz sagt:

    @Till: Correct, there is a danger of constriction, as I noted here: http://dselz.ch/en/2011/09/30/das-problem-mit-digitaler-personalisierung/ . If it’s only algorithms this is an issue (As the “cleaned” Facebook feed demonstrates). That’s why I think it needs human interposition to open up the perspective.

    Re Scarcity vs Attention. As said the digital age only exacerbates this trend. There was more music than I ever could have listened to before MP3 (and ever since). The availability was a different matter though. The digitization changed this drastically. All music is now available everywhere at any given moment. That’s why I think the attention issue is ever more important.

    Re Dobelli: True, “Britney Spears is overrated. IPCC reports are
    underrated.” Yet, as outlined above a good news organization in the future will have to focus on providing context. And context is more thank just factual reporting on what happened with Britney or the latest IPCC figures.

    @Christoph: I did not know of the Bonnier concept. Happy to see that media companies think along the same lines (at least in the Nordics, as my experience is that news organization in our whereabouts are rather more reluctant on this…) Indeed it is of similar intend. So I guess this just reinforces the points made in the post.

Kommentare sind geschlossen.