In the linked article, the blogger argues that main stream media (MSM) is looking to blame technology for its lost audience share and to not realize that the cure is content. As he constantly notes, "It’s The Content, Stupid". And while I have continually argued that content is king, I believe that his argument is misplaced.
The reason that the MSM share has declined is not because of technology alone, it is due to the fact that the audience embraces content that is convenient and readily available. Technology has simply enabled content to reach its audience faster and in a form that best suits the users' need. The NY Times example, that subscription is declining, as argued in the blog, because the content is not relevant, that because their stance on Iraq was not accurate, readership left.
I disagree. Regardless of the NY Times stance, readers left because they could receive similar content faster and more efficiently through other technology means. Breaking news is more relevant on the web, business news changes in moments and the web and mobile can deliver that news directly. The NY Times may see a declining readership, not because they may have gotten the story wrong, but because the content is being better served elsewhere. Yes, it is the content, but it is also how it is made available. And that is the value that technology brings to content. It lowers the barriers and expands the reach. The NY Times needs to change to reflect a changing environment. It's content needs to be more relevant in a print mode than a web mode.
His argument regarding Rosie O'Donnell and her departure from The View is also nonsensical How did MSM banish Rosie? And how can he argue that audience has eroded as a result. It is just not true. And In that particular example, it's not about content, it was simply about bad manners.
