Last Week, there was an interesting article in the Washington Post regarding “new laws to save journalism.” Bruce Sanford and Bruce Brown co-wrote this article, where they proposed that journalism can be saved by creating laws that support the industry, which they claim is being murdered by the internet.
While their article is an interesting discussion, it seems completely lined with folly. First off, they equate the industry of journalism with print, which is a huge oversimplification. What journalism needs is better business model to adapt to the changing technologies, not stronger copyright laws and antitrust exemption. The philosophy taken by Sanford and Brown is as bad as the recorded music industry during the past ten years. As record labels kept their head in the sand, industry outsiders dominated online distribution, like Apple and Emusic.
Matt Cutts, a google employee who blogs regularly on such topics, commented on this article saying:
“Last week I was on vacation down in Florida and I had a chance to tour Thomas Edison’s winter vacation home. The tour guide told us that Edison wired his house and switched on electrical lighting in 1887. Then the tour guide leaned in and quietly mentioned that it took 11 years to install lights in the rest of the town. Why so long? Because the townspeople were worried that cows would stop giving milk.
“I believe good journalism is critically important to a well-functioning society. I love newspapers, magazines, and the journalists that they support. But I disagree with Bruce Sanford and Bruce Brown, and reading their piece reminded me of those townspeople sitting in the dark, afraid to switch on their electric lights.”
