Overholser, Geneva. "On Behalf of Journalism: A Manifesto for Change." Philadelphia: The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. 2009.

Overholser's article follows a June 2005 gathering of journalists and scholars at the Annenberg Public Policy Center, and many of her arguments stem from the discussions at that seminar. While maintaining a realistic and attainable vision of the future of journalism (and practical admission that "journalism as we know it is over"), Overholser argues that journalism is ideally a marshall of democracy and necessary to American freedom and must (and will) continue to exist, just in a new form. By discussing the responsibilities of journalists - as ethical, objective, professional, accountable sources - along with the responsibilities of the public and the government to support journalism in its ideal form, Overholser asserts that "what's needed is wide-open thinking about how consumers use information, and where they are getting it, and how old media companies can fulfill those needs while bringing the best of their traditions onto new platforms."

Overholser's article is comprehensive, realistic, and yet hopeful. Her refreshing outlook is that journalism has changed for good, but that that change is a welcome chance to re-evaluate, throw out the tired and unhealthy aspects of 'old world' media, and recommit to the "core values of the craft." She examines several options for the future of journalism – non-profit status, local ownership, media ownership rules, greater professionalization of 'citizen journalists' by means of agreed-upon standards – and all with the outlook that since the public will demand goof work, journalism will be here for the long haul. Overholser adeptly suggests that the problem with modern journalism isn't in the journalists, but in the public; and we must be encouraging better civics and news literacy education to help the public play their role better. It isn't journalism - the protector of democracy and leader in civic education - that is in danger of death, it is the media news conglomorates, and Overholser seems optimistic that their deaths may not injure democracy much.

Newspaper Revitalization Act 2009.<http://cardin.senate.gov/pdfs/newspaperbill.pdf> March 24, 2009.

If it pases, this proposed legislation by Senator Cardin will allow certain newspapers with 'educational' value to restructure as non-profits and benefit from tax-exemption under IRS code 501(a).

This proposal is one of many ideas that are currently on the table to 'rescue' the faltering newspaper industry. According to many sources, this legislation will not suffice to solve the problems of journalism (for a full critique see "Saving the News"), but it may provide a new avenue for some newspapers. Furthermore, the bill may suffice to protect enough investigative journalism to protect democracy, while other solutions turn to helping media turn a profit and meet the needs of the public.

Kramer, Joel. "Lessons I’ve learned after a year running MinnPost." Nieman Journalism Lab. March 19, 2009.

This anecdotal article by Joel Kramer provides insight into some of the challenges to professional online journalism. His brief and readable story of running the online news site, MinnStar, addresses issues such as user commentary, video integration, and start-up costs.

Kramer's most important point for my thesis is his process of screening user commentary with volunteer moderators. As he puts it, "We took plenty of heat from web-savvy readers for this decision. But as readers have watched the quality of comment on respected sites that don’t require real names, many are now grateful for our approach. Recently we published our 7,000th comment. Some sites with looser standards appear to be reconsidering their no-holds-barred policies." This MinnStar policy may or may not be forward thinking, but it is an example of one version of user interaction with news sites. MinnStar doesn't use citizen journalism the way, say, TalkingPointsMemo, does, but according to Kramer, they are exploring possibilities. This demonstrates the lack of an industry standard for harnessing citizen journalists, but emphasizes the growing awareness for policies and methods for intertwining professional quality journalism and usergenerated content.

Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism. "The State of the News Media: an annual report on american journalism."

This annual report from the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism reports on the state of online jornalism. With substantial charts and research, the overview is an accurate discussion of both where many news organizations stand currently and where they may be (and some are) heading in the furture. The report's thorough treatment of both online content and economic viability address both the demands of the public and the needs of news reporting organizations.

The report provides valuable support for my thesis with its statistic and solid reporting. One particularly valuable section is the survey on "Top Issues in Online Media vs. Media Over All." The chart demonstrates that though the top three news story subjects (election, U.S. economy, Iraq War) are mirrored between online and all media, beyond that the statistics vary. Online, users have more say regarding which issues are covered, it is easy to track exactly which stories are most read, most shared, most commented on; in a print newspaper, information is much more general. This chart exposes how media overall may not be addressing the issues that are actually of most interest to their constituents. And, of interest to my thesis, it supports the idea that as more media incorporates methods for users to share and comment and contribute to media stories, the gap between stories that interest users and ones that do not interest them will widen as sites like Digg bring user approved content back to the top over and over, while stories of no interest to readers die after one day (or hour) on the front page.

Keller, Bill. “Not Dead Yet: The newspaper in the days of digital anarchy.” Lecture delivered at The Guardian in honor of Hugo Young. November, 29 2007. guardian.co.uk

In addition to providing an intellectual analysis of the future of journalism, Bill Keller’s address (appropriately for his audience) begins sentimentally, with anecdotes about Hugh Young, The New York Times, The Guardian and journalism as a profession. But halfway through the address Keller provides the meat of his discussion, which is his educated opinion about the future of newspapers and journalism.

Keller's main argument emphasizes that the differences between the investigative reporting of The New York Times or The Guardian and GoogleNews or Wikipedia's "legions of bloggers." "What is absent from the vast array of new media outlets is," Keller argues, "the great engine of newsgathering – the people who witness events, ferret out information, supply context and explanation." Though Keller rightly points out that opinion and journalism are different, he falsely accuses all internet commentors and 'citizen journalists' of being holed up behind computer screens rather than being active human participants in the world. Certainly there are differences between bloggers and journalists, but what Keller seems to mistake is that journalists must be associated with The Times or The Guardian or The Boston Globe in order to be investigative journalists, or even to "witness events," "ferret out information" or "supply context and explanation."

European Publishers Council. "Hamburg Declaration Regarding Intellectual Property Rights." Berlin: European Publishers Council. June 25, 2009.

This brief statement from the European Publishers Council (EPC) argues for "urgent improvements in the protection of intellectual property on the Internet." Without providing an answer to the problem or even asserting a path toward improvement of the situation, the statement simply places the onus of blame on sites that index their content. Meanwhile, the statement applauds national and internation governments for their efforts to protect international property.

Practically speaking, this statement is fairly ineffectual. Google's response has been essentially, "Go ahead and stop us from indexing your content" – a response that clearly demonstrates how vital news aggregation is to online media. Without offering a solution that will help users find content online while also crediting the correct sources, the EPC doesn't have much weight to throw around. This statement, instead, serves as a thermometer of the rising tension between investigative journalists and news aggregation websites.

Alterman, Eric. "The News Business: Out of Print: The death and life of the American newspaper." The New Yorker. March 31, 2008.

In this article, Alterman discusses the advantages, disadvantages, history, debates, and differing opinions concerning the migration of journalism from print to the internet. He begins by laying the scene, briefly calling on the history of print journalism while discussing current trends and the current bleak state of affairs for print media. The bulk of the article outlines the differences – good and bad – between internet blogging and news aggregation sites and traditional newsroom journalism. Alterman’s main argument centers around the Huffington Post, a political news and gossip website, as an example of the future of journalism. Central to Alterman’s discussion is the role of the reader/consumer of news. Using the contrast between Walter Lippmann and John Dewey's differing ideas of idylic political journalism, Alterman argues that the Internet is the swing from Lippmannesque (boys club, top down media) to Deweyish (public opinion driven, community contribution media) philosophies of journalism. Alterman’s prognosis is gloomy, particularly since he dwells on the fact that many online news sites prefer to aggregate news from print media, heresay and user commentary rather than funding their own investigative journalism.

Alterman’s argument addresses the central theme of my thesis: the difference between traditional journalism and internet-generation journalism. His discussion of 'the mullet strategy' (where websites like The Huffington Post keep a closely edited front page but allow users to fill their subpages with unedited commentary and opinion), is an excellent analysis of how media companies might control but still incorporate public contribtions. Alterman's article also raises an important issue concerning the future of journalism: that The Huffington Post flags stories from other news sources but "shoulders none of the costs" of investigating and writing the story. This issue is indeed central to the discussion, but Alterman's argument falters when he claims that The Huffington Post's hiring of Thomas Edsall, a forty-year veteran of The Washington Post, as its political editor is a "rare" example. For a foward-looking article such as this, Alterman could be expected to see that such hirings might very quickly become industry standard. And as print journalism aficionados move toward 'citizen journalism' sites, their presence will provide credibility and professionalism for the front page, and probably beyond.

McLeary, Paul. "How TalkingPointsMemo Beat the Big Boys on the U.S. Attorney Story." Columbia Journalism Review. March 15, 2007.

This article by Paul McLeary overviews the role the news and gossip website TalkingPointsMemo played in breaking a news story about illegal firings of U.S. Attorneys. The article focuses on the ability of TalkingPointsMemo to bring a story to light in a different way than was possible for traditional journalists. TalkingPointsMemo, McLeary points out, harnessed their online sources effectively to tap a "variety of sources that had been largely untapped by the mainstream press" and to break the story before most traditional press rooms.

The method of journalism outlined by McLeary serves as an example of a possible model for future journalism. TalkingPointsMemo's success with the U.S. Attorney story exemplifies a hybrid method of journalism wherein 'citizen journalism' is combined with an editorial process to create reliable stories quickly and effectively. McLeary points out that sites like TalkingPointsMemo that display a "model of reporting [that] ... straddl[es] the divide between old school shoe-leather reporting and the more aggregate method of Web reporting" are rare, but if the effectiveness continues, the scarcity won't last long.

Kaufman vs. Islamic Society of Arlington, Texas, Islamic Center of Irving, DFW Islamic Educational Center, INC., Dar Elsalam Islamic Center, Al Hedayah Islamic Center, Islamic Association of Tarrannt County and Muslim American Society of Dallas. No. 2-09-023-CV. January 22, 2009.

This court of appeals decision from Texas rules on the case of Kaufman, the author of an online article asserting that Islamic extremists and terrorists were invading Six Flags during their Muslim Family Day. The court decided in favor of Kaufman, arguing that his article did not refer to any of the groups that filed suit against him, and that a 'reasonable reader' would in no way link the groups and implicate the Islamic groups in question with the groups mentioned by Kaufman as terrorist affiliated. The court asserts that "...an internet author's status as a member of the electronic media should be adjudged by the same principles that courts should use to determine the author's status under more traditional media." It's decision classifies Kaufman as an 'online journalist' and argues that his legal rights are thus equal to those of traditional journalists.

Though the court's decision in favor of Kaufman holds little bearing on my thesis, their ruling affects the validity and status of online journalism because it equates it with print and traditional journalism. They argued that a blogger writing without an editor and without performing investigation and substantiation of their claims would not necessarliy be considered an online journalist and would not necessarily receive the same legal rights as online journalists like Kaufman. The questions is, of course, what makes Kaufman a 'journalist'. The court quoted U.S.C.A 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) (West Supp. 2009), arguing that media includes "any 'person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the way materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.'" By this measure, bloggers who discuss news (as opposed to just personal experience and opinion) are certainly included in the realm of online media.

Accenture Media and Entertainment. "The Challenge of Change: Perspectives on the future for Content Providers." Accenture Global Content Study 2008. Accenture: 2008.

This report is the result of a market research firm initiative, in which they surveyed 100 entertainment executives to determine their opinions on the future of revenue models based on digital media. The results of the survey show that the ad-based model is the most popular model for the surveyed executives, as opposed to subscription or iTunes-like services. Though the focus in the report seems to be on forms of entertainment other than music media, it provides a successful context for profit-garnering models in digital entertainment. It also reflects the point of view of those that will ultimately be responsible for shaping the way that media is transferred to the consumer (legally) online.

This report represents yet another perspective on successful provision of internet content (without greater legislation). The importance of advertising on maintaining free content on the internet cannot be understated -- many argue that advertising-based models represent the future of music revenue. Ad-based music models are already being put into place: the music-search engine developed by Google in China, for example. The Accenture report is important, therefore, because it provides data and quotes from industry experts that address the longstanding relationship between advertising and entertainment.

The thesis of this article is that for the major recording labels to stay atop the music industry, they will have to embrace both technological and creative risks.

They will need to find ways to reach more users via the internet. Until recently, recording companies have viewed the internet as the enemy rather than an opportunity. They have gone with the strategy of litigating the fans that use peer to peer networks instead of finding a sustainable business model that will put their content online. As a result, sales decreased by a fifth between 1999 and 2003.

More recently, however, the recording industry has made inroads to accepting that the internet and digital technology will shape the music industry’s future. Apple’s iTunes service proved to music executives that the legal download market is viable. With this realization, recording companies are trying to figure out how to change their business model to take advantage of the internet.

Another problem which is just as important as piracy is the recording companies’ inability to develop new artists into strong sustainable brand names. The emphasis on one hit wonders is also to blame for the decline in CD sales. In fact, an internal report at one of the major recording studios found that between 2/3 and ¾ of the decline in CD sales was unrelated to online piracy. By embracing the internet, which bypasses more conservative retailers, the recording companies could gain the confidence to support new, innovative music.

Additionally, when an online business model unfolds, higher quality artists will be more profitable. Currently people buy single tracks much more often than whole albums. However, it is in the recording studios interest for users to spend 12$ on a whole album from one artist than to buy 2 songs from 6 different artists.

Importance to Thesis:

This article is important to my thesis in that it helps highlight the strategic mistakes that recording companies are repeating in response to peer-to-peer networks.  Music companies are exaggerating the threat of P2P networks, just as movie studios exaggerated the threat of the VCR.  In fact, the majority of the recent decline in CD sales is due to factors other than online piracy.  In addition, recording companies ignored the new markets that they could reach through online distribution, just as movie studios neglected to see that the VCR would expand their viewer base.  This article thus helps draw two parallels between the VCR and P2P networks, and allows me to apply historical lessons to the current situation facing recording companies.  

This article explains the current dominance that Apple exerts on our digital music experience and how it could potentially become the epicenter of media consumption. Currently, it is impossible to download, organize and listen to music without iTunes. Furthermore, iTunes has created a “network effect” whereby its immense popularity spurs demand for other artists and advertisers to be on iTunes as well. iTunes is thus cemented as the face of our interaction with digital music. This same relationship could soon exist with video media if Apple gets access to Disney’s large library of movies and TV shows. One analyst forecasts that the iPod will become a “Tivo and a music player that you can take anywhere.”

This scenario, however, may be further down the road. Hollywood still opposes distributing copyrighted material over the internet. Additionally, being the epicenter of digital media consumption is not “itself a business right now.” In the future, Apple may find a way to turn this large audience into advertising revenue, and thus a legitimate profitable business.

Importance to Thesis:

This article is relevant to my third argument, which is that Apple represents the way media companies should react and adapt to changing technologies.  Apple, through its iTunes and iPod, took advantage of the changing methods of media consumption.  By anticipating that consumers would need both a device to play their music, and an interface that makes dealing with a large library manageable, Apple made itself the name brand associated with digital music.  The dominant position both iTunes and the iPod enjoy is a testament to this foresight.  Furthermore, the position Apple is putting itself in with regards to video media is a repetition of Apple’s ability to see how peer-to-peer technology has changed the competitive landscape for media consumption.  In contrast to media companies who fight to save the status quo, Apple has placed itself where a business does not even exist, but when it does, Apple stands to benefit enormously. 

This article discusses the Disney-Pixar merger and its implications for Apple and the future of online media delivery. As a result of the merger, Steve Jobs solidified himself as one of the most powerful executives in the continuing convergence of media content and online delivery, especially as movie studios now look to extend their digital reach.

Apple stands to benefit from the ability to distribute Disney’s animation studio’s content as well as its array of broadcast networks, namely ABC and ESPN. However, video media has been available online in the form of Pixar short films and more recently since the merger, Disney animated shorts.

As Jobs has already proved the viability of the online delivery of music, video-on-demand makes sense as the next step in rounding out the iTunes platform. By now gaining access to Disney’s video content, it makes developing the video on demand stage easier. Before, Apple was dependent on apprehensive third parties for content, specifically the record labels who doubted the viability of a legal download market. Apple needed large scale support because iTunes would only be successful if there was a large collection of downloadable music. In contrast, the dynamics of video on demand are different in that Apple can start with Disney and add more networks further down the road.

If Apple pursues the video content road, it will likely replicate its revenue model with online music. The majority of Apple’s money is made on sales of iPods, not on sales of legal downloads. Thus, Apple’s strategy was to drive consumer demand for its iPod devices through the access to digital music media. In this vein, Apple will most likely launch a new device, most probably a home entertainment center, to deliver its online video content.

Importance to Thesis:

This article helps support my third argument, which is that Apple has become the example of how media companies should adapt to technological change. By developing the preferred user interface for access to online media content, Apple has positioned itself not only as a technology company, but now as a major player in the media industry. Where 5 years ago Apple wasn’t even involved in media, it now controls the future of content delivery. Thus, by seeing the peer-to-peer phenomenon as an evolution in consumers demanding online media content (both music and video), Apple has put itself in the position to take advantage of the this technological evolution.

In this case, a number of different record companies came together to sue Napster. Their claim was that Napster’s peer-to-peer file sharing service was liable for “contributory and vicarious” copyright infringement. The district court ruled in favor of the recording studios and issued a preliminary injunction against Napster. Napster had to police its servers and remove all copyright infringing material. The district court monitored Napster’s progress and after three months, determined that Napster was not satisfactorily complying with the injunction. Then, the district court required Napster to shut off its peer-to-peer servers until it met certain conditions.

The recording companies argued that Napster should have to search for and block all files that infringed on copyrighted material. They transferred responsibility for locating infringing files to Napster. However, Napster argued that this modification to the injunction was vague with respect to how Napster should monitor its servers.

The court ruled with the district court and affirmed the decision to shut Napster down unless it could abide by the modified injunction.

Importance to Thesis:

This case is important to my thesis because it helps develop my second argument, which is that recording companies today are making the same strategic mistakes that movie studios made in response to the VCR.  The first mistake they are repeating is that they are acting as an industry, not as individual companies.  It is evident from the fact that five separate lawsuits were consolidated into this case that all the recording companies decided to deal with the peer-to-peer threat the same way; namely, litigiously.  The second mistake they are repeating is focusing narrow mindedly on the current perceived threat without considering how this new technology may change the competitive landscape.  By modifying the injunction such that Napster must police itself, the recording studios purposefully made it impossible for Napster to comply, which led to its eventual closure.  This indicates that the recording studios strategy was to eradicate peer-to-peer networks entirely.