Subscribe: Comments on: The unbearable weight of infrastructure
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
anchor  archive  blog archive  blog  discuss points  don  giving people  jarvis  jeff jarvis  jeff  market  media  news  raising  show  story 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: The unbearable weight of infrastructure

Comments on: The unbearable weight of infrastructure

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Last Build Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2017 09:52:00 +0000


By: My Get Things Done List » Blog Archive » Web-based News is a Growth Market [Hidden Dragon BizBlog 1.2]

Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:09:51 +0000

[...] “exploding Market”, if you ask Jeff Jarvis. Read this post from his trip to the National Association of Broadcasters/Radio Television News Directors [...]

By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Betting on Black20

Thu, 10 May 2007 12:08:23 +0000

[...] in Black20. The new means to produce and distribute — contrasted with the incredible cost of the old ways — opens up incredible opportunity. Keep an eye on the guys at [...]

By: Web-based News is a Growth Market

Sat, 05 May 2007 18:13:42 +0000

[...] “exploding Market”, if you ask Jeff Jarvis. Read this post from his trip to the National Association of Broadcasters/Radio Television News Directors [...]

By: OLDaily[中文版] » Blog Archive » 2007å¹´5月1æ—¥

Wed, 02 May 2007 20:50:16 +0000

[...] Jess Jarvis, Buzz Machine May 1, 2007 [原文链接] [Tags: Online Learning] [...]

By: Scorched Earth Screeds on Citizen vs. Professional Media | Verge New Media

Tue, 01 May 2007 18:02:41 +0000

[...] we all just get along? As two of my favorite foils, Michael Rosenblum and Jeff Jarvis were storming the gates of traditional TV at the NAB conference in Vegas, many of the journalists [...]

By: Best fresh links from all world ! » Links today

Tue, 01 May 2007 07:35:42 +0000

[...] šBuzzMachine ' Blog Archive ' The unbearable weight of infrastructure [...]

By: hey

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:47:58 +0000

ok it's not anything like brilliant journalism, but the City-TV operation in Canada, along with some of the cable nets in the Chum family that owns city and is currently being sold to CTV/BellGlobemedia, have run on this model for decades. They were the 4th station and poor, so the reporter carried his own camera, shooting, interviewing, editing, etc. They do a decent job and its a great way to stretch resources. Just try getting that through the infinite unions at a major net - another reason why being a D is an idiotic idea for anyone that wants to innovate. As for leveraging - Robert Feinman displays his complete ignorance and utter lack of intellect. Companies should endeavour to minimise their cost of capital - raising equity when debt is expensive or risky, raising debt when it can manage the payments and it costs less than equity. IBM is simply re-arranging its balance sheet to something closer to the optimum for its current situation and the prevailing rates. To despair over a simple act of raising money betrays ones total, abject ignorance and indicates that you should be ignored on all political questions, since they are all inherently economic questions and you have demonstrated that you don't even have a basic grasp of micro-economics. Further, you're relying on a columnist, in the NYT no less, and not an actually competent business paper, to give you information about a company that you presumably have invested in. An actually competent investor would be following his companies of interest in EDGAR, the investor relations section of the IBM site, and the various financial news sites (free like Yahoo or Google, or subscription such as WSJ). Raising debt or equity is an activity that must be announced publicly and forms filed with the SEC (even with shelf registrations), so the columnist was just being a crotchety ignoramus like yourself.

By: zak822

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:58:03 +0000

Interesting post. Except it's not journalism anymore, it's about "entertainment". Heaven forfend we should challenge viewers with the stuff they really ought to know. I mean, that stuff boring, right? Besides, we all know bin Laden and Hussein were cozy buddies, right? We don't need Katie to tell us that! "Giving people enough time to discuss their points seems to be a lost art on TV." is directly related to that boring thing. Sadly, it was the only good thing about the Don Imus show, and it will be missed. Last, the anchor is a holdover from the early days of TV, when that person in your living room actually was a trusted soul who might even tell you the truth. Try to find that in an anchor now! The lies of omission are crushing.

By: Tansley - addendum

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:25:27 +0000

There is an alternative to the 'anchor syndrom' that has driven the bulk of Network news for decades. It's already in practice, at THE NEWS HOUR (a name you'll recognize, I'm sure, Jeff...) Admittedly, Jim Lehrer is 'the' main anchor...however, it's one of the few shows I know where other contributing reporters - Margaret Warner, Gwen Ifel, Ray Suarez, Judy Woodruff...take TURNS anchoring, depending on when Jim's away. Gwen, of course, has her own show (Washington Week in Review), but I never fail to find it refreshing to see one of the other members of the show's staff filling Jim's chair. This has a very levelling effect to the whole anchor-chair thing - and somehow, for me at least, enhances the level of trust I place in the show. Instead of one 'anchor,' it would seem the solution would be to enable any of the reporting staff to assume control, depending on the story being reported. A very egalitarian and neat solution to the whole 'supersized salary' issue, too...

By: SteveSgt

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:51:35 +0000

You wrote: "Of course, it wouldn’t all fit in 22 minutes a day. But to hell with those 22 minutes. Feed the web with reporting." We already have that -- it's called CSPAN. You can get all of the raw news you want, if you're willing to devote days and days to sift through the boredom. I think Jeff's battle cry should be, "let them watch (eat?) CSPAN!"

By: A First Step | Garrick Van Buren .com

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:04:04 +0000

[...] First Step 11:03am 30 April 2007 (8 seconds ago) Newspapers , Citizen Media “…take 100 great journalists, give them small HD camcorders and laptops and say ‘h... - Garrick Van [...]

By: Derek Slater

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:23:41 +0000

Over the years, with some exceptions such as Moyer perhaps, the anchor's position has gravitated toward personality, not credibility. It's increasingly an entertainment job. That's why ugly TV anchors are a rare breed.

By: Greg0658

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:32:55 +0000

Equipment, production workers, and management makes commerce. Without commerce theres no jobs. End of cycle. Its a matter of Balance. IMO Wall Street and corporate raiders don't get. I guess they do, its their game. Its Us who don't get it.

By: Robert Feinman

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:01:18 +0000

The problem with TV news is that it requires pictures. Stories which don't have a visual component don't get much coverage on TV. This is why we hardly ever see stories about white collar crime until there is a perp walk and/or a trial. Last week NY Times columnist Floyd Norris wrote about IBM borrowing money to finance buying back its stock. This is an important story for investors since it shows the degree of folly firms will participate in to boost their stock price. I doubt that this will be covered by the TV news, not because it is too wonky, but because there is no visual hook. Even when non-event stories are covered, they are illustrated with superfluous graphics. A story of gasoline prices will always show someone filling up their car. The underling of what the narration says (every noun gets a picture) weakens the impact of the narration since the viewer is concentrating on the more captivating visual instead of the spoken material. Now with divided screens it is even harder to focus on a story. Bill Moyers provided a stark contrast the other night on his new series. He spent half the show talking to Jon Stewart and half talking to Josh Marshall. The only graphics were video clips which acted as quoted material to put the discussion in context. Giving people enough time to discuss their points seems to be a lost art on TV.

By: Rosenblum

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:57:49 +0000

Jeff Needless to say I found the above fascinating reading! But your video does need technical work. Why don't you come down to my 4-day VJ course in Miami in May. (Its on me). I think you'll find that with a few lessons your shots will be as good as the pros! (perhaps even better).