Comments on: ‘Hi, you’re hysterical and biased, please subscribe to the NBR’

By: The NBR is in trouble – what should they do? « Lance Wiggs

The NBR is in trouble – what should they do? « Lance Wiggs — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:36:44 +0000

[...] phrasing, and guaranteed to get the aforementioned bloggers going. Cactus Kate, Whale Oil, and Julie Starr have plenty of commentry. I wonder, given Whale Oil’s profile in the SST last Sunday, whether [...]

By: Raf

Raf — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:55:54 +0000

I am reminded that I wrote a 1500 word piece on sustainable business for the NBR back in 2004 and didn’t get paid for it…hmmm.

But seriously over the last 3 years all the best financial journalism has come from bloggers, many of whom are ex-market players who actually understand what they are writing about.

Of course we don’t all have the ear of decision makers but perhaps that is the point of being independent.

Very droll.

By: Peter Hodge

Peter Hodge — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:51:23 +0000

decimated newsrooms
“The alternative is newsrooms decimated to the point of processing public relations handouts or unedited government propaganda from their fully staffed team of spin doctors.”

Is this opposed to NZPA, Fairfax and APN plagerising the releases the spin doctors send out and putting their own names on them? Or does the public need a decrepit egotistical editor telling them what is and is not news?

citizen journalism
“Most of these “citizen journalists” don’t have access to decision makers and are infamous for their biased and inaccurate reporting on almost any subject under the sun (while invariably criticising professional news coverage whose original material they depend on to base their diatribes). ”

Interesting how they slate citizen journalists, bloggers and Spin doctors. Where do the majority of their own news stories originate from?

And why are they opposed to them when they allow users to post their own news on “from the horses mouth”, which surely is another angle on citizen journalism?

we posted their own newsletter on nbr.co.nz to show the absolute contradiction they are.

By: Julie Starr

Julie Starr — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:43:55 +0000

@Bill @Bernard Yep, I’ve seen it elsewhere. I don’t think it will work either. Ach, good on them for trying, I suppose. But best not irritate your potential audience in the first instance.

By: Bernard Hickey

Bernard Hickey — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:35:02 +0000

Charging more online than for the print edition (in relative terms) is a strategy some newspapers are adopting to force their readers to buy the paper edition rather than read online.

That’s one approach to business I suppose. I don’t think it will work.

cheers
Bernard

By: Bill Bennett

Bill Bennett — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:39:00 +0000

I just figured out that online subscription deal is exceptionally bad value compared to the print subscription deal.

By: Julie Starr

Julie Starr — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:17:59 +0000

Quite so.

By: Brenda

Brenda — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:09:23 +0000

Additionally, NBR are very happy to source their information from bloggers, quoting them frequently as their source in stories.