The Daily’s problem was simply that they weren’t conceived to operate on $5 or $6 million per year in revenue. A smarter, smaller team could.
Tablets, it turns out, are a great way to consume content which was designed for some other medium, like books, movies, and videos. But weirdly, magazines and newspapers are having a harder time of making the transition: there are many books I prefer in electronic format, but there isn’t a single magazine or newspaper which I’d rather read on the iPad than on paper.
The promise of the iPad was that it would usher in a rich-media world combining the versatility of the web with the high-design glossiness of magazines; the reality is that it fell short on both counts.
"The impossibility of tablet-native journalism | Felix Salmon
Having been thinking this, too:
The more I understand about Medium, the more trouble I have seeing how it co-exists with another Williams startup, Branch. It seems like they’re both camped out in the same space betw blogging and Twitter. That as the two products evolve they will keep colliding with each other.
Bennett: Even if you have a long-form story, which we’ve seen a big resurgence of on Tumblr in general, choosing the right photo to go with it and choosing where you want your text break to be. The fact of the matter is people don’t want to have to scroll endlessly to get through your post — they want to look at the headline, maybe a few lines of text and the photo, and decide if it’s something they want to click on. I think people think a lot about their display and imagery on Tumblr, almost in a way more so than they would a regular website.
Circa wants to save journalism by killing articles — what’s wrong and right about that | PandoDaily
(via briannegarcia)
the principle itself is a frightening one. Not only can you remove physical content—Orwell hasn’t been the only one to disappear off of a Kindle device—but you can change, in a sense, the digital record. And what happens when there actually aren’t any physical books behind those electronic versions—and then a publisher or retailer not only removes all links to the book in question, but then proceeds to remove the already purchased book from your reading device? Imagine: When all of your books are in digital form, what is the backup system if they are of a sudden removed?
An e-book is not a physical book. That point might seem trite until you stop for a moment to think how much simpler it is, in a certain sense, to destroy electronic than physical traces. There’s no need of inciting mass cooperation in book-burning enterprises. No need for secret police or raids or extensive surveillance. The power to remove a book from a device, to remove all traces of it from retailers’ websites, to expunge it from a publisher’s online record: It would simplify the work of a would-be Soviet Union or Oceania multifold, would it not? It’s ugly. For all kinds of reasons.
"How to Make a Book Disappear - Maria Konnikova - The Atlantic