As I've said time and time again, I am an avid supporter of alternative media--and I mean that in all forms of the term. Independent blogging is not only tremendous in lending a different perspective, but also in uncovering grassroots stories that might not otherwise get coverage. In the same way, alternative albeit still large corporations are also important in developing a holistic view of a subject matter (think Al Jazeera to CNN and FOX Sports 1 to ESPN).
But at the end of the day, our culture has become inherently lazy, and it makes a lot more sense for most 21st century human beings to simply hit that "Favorites" or "Suggested" tab and go to the CNN, ESPN, and Yahoo!'s of the world purely because it's easier. In turn, these alternative media groups struggle in terms of funding and advertising--and many subsequently cease to exist.
I know our first reading is about Josh Marshall and "Talking Points"--which has succeeded has an independent outlet--and the second a slideshow of other successful indy groups/apps, but, unfortunately, Marshall's speech came in 2008 before his platform doubled and even tripled in popularity.
Instead, in keeping with this topic, I'd like to discuss Glen Greenwald's announcement this week that he will be launching an all-new, independent media outlet ala the lines of Arianna Huffington's The Huffington Post.
No one knows for sure how Greenwald will fare in this business venture; he could very well end up like the FOX Sports 1's of the world, a competitor but eternally behind "the worldwide leader in sports." Or his platform could end up like Al Jazeera, a very successful website but which is just coming to the United States this year.
Personally, though, for all the reservations I have about independent media's financial success, I think Greenwald's platform will succeed--although whether it will surpass Huffington or be an "Al Jazeera" to HuffPost remains to be seen. The reason: he's Glen Greenwald. He's an already established figure with an active following. People will log on just because he's known to be an authority on media already. But the issue is (and I promise, this will be my last FOX Sports comparison!) that he needs to deliver from the get-go. FOX Sports 1 built up the hype about its new platform this summer. It was bringing in former pro athletes as commentators--and we're taking Donovan McNabb and Andy Roddick here. But Roddick struggled early on in his reporting repitoire. They brought in Regis Philbin to host a game show on a sports network and the ratings still are not nearly at the level of a "Wheel of Fortune" or "Jeopardy." And so people went back to ESPN.
If Glen Greenwald wants to make the money to sustain his product for years to come--which he definitely has the potential to do--he needs to keep that niche audience he has entertained and engaged. If he can do that, he'll gain the advertising revenue he needs to keep this thing going. But it's going to be these next few, opening months of the platform that will determine if the dollars... make sense.
No comments:
Post a Comment