Dallas - Unfair Park - "Content Matters."

Sen. Royce West: "No Elected Official is Indispensable"

TxDOT's Proposals to the Corps: Do Nothing and Build a Pile of Dirt

They Don't Hate the Dallas Cowboys. They Hate Cowboys Fans

"Content Matters."

By Robert Wilonsky in Media

Wednesday, May. 6 2009 @ 6:13PM

David Simon, sitting to the left of Dallas Morning News publisher Jim Moroney at today's Senate subcommittee hearing on "The Future of Journalism," edited his prepared testimony. The creator of The Wire left out the part about how, when a newspaper exec complains about how technology is the sole reason for newspapers' demise, folks should "feel free to kick out his teeth," because that newspaper exec is "as fraudulent as the most self-aggrandizing blogger." Nonetheless, the former Baltimore Sun writer still emptied at least one barrel on his way to endorsing the non-profit model: "My industry butchered itself." (I know, I know -- we're all becoming non-profits.)

Moroney -- who told the gathering of senators that The Dallas Morning News spends $30 million on news-gathering, more than all the Dallas network TV affiliates combined -- offered several life-saving suggestions to the panel. After the jump, as promised, you will find his opening remarks, which ran a little under five minutes. And here's C-SPAN's broadcast of the entire hearing, which ran nearly three hours. C'mon, it's Wednesday night. Nothing else is on.

Related Content

More About...

11 comment(s) / Post a Comment

religion of bacon says:

C'mon, it's Tuesday night.

Umm...

Posted On: Wednesday, May. 6 2009 @ 6:34PM

Robert Wilonsky says:

Wait. What happened to Tuesday? Damn.

Thanks. Fixed.

Posted On: Wednesday, May. 6 2009 @ 6:51PM

Heywood U. Buzzoff says:

$30,000,000 -- that is $29,000,000 for Steve Blow, $990,000 for the sports team and the rest for the Life/Travel writers.

Posted On: Wednesday, May. 6 2009 @ 7:30PM

Enrico says:

MORONey and his dipshit cousin Decherd need only look in the mirror to find the reason for their abysmal failure at running a newspaper.

Posted On: Wednesday, May. 6 2009 @ 7:48PM

chris von danger says:

Papers, Like the entertainment industry, need to realize that its not 1958 anymore. People have more choices for in-depth news and analysis on tv and the internet. The "good ol' days" of the daily beat reporter and the rolodex of contacts have been replaced by bloggers who narrowcast their stories to the public via the written, spoken or videocasted word. Not saying that Journalistic standards should be thrown out the window, but adapted for now. For the daily papers to survive, they need to adapt accordingly as well. Give us reasons to pay a buck and a half on sunday for something besides the funnies, parade magazine and coupons. Lastly, private business needs to quit asking for a handout. If Belo cant cut it in the paper business, they need to fail...

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 8:42AM

Tom says:

David Simon's testimony and comments were worth the three hours. He speculated that news corporations would adapt to new media, then, instead of building their newsroom staffs back to pre-crisis levels, reward their executives with bonuses and shareholders with profits.
He also noted that newspaper execs could have started making these changes as early as 1995, but they thought the Internet was a fad.

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 8:49AM

Scott says:

The issue of charging for the paper is an interesting factor. The DO has what we lay people are told are the most coveted consumers, or advertizees--young literate folk.

Here the charging for the paper limits the DMN's circulation. I wonder what percentage subscriptions are toward total revenue.

I wonder what you guys here at DO and UnFP think of the many news stories about the importance of old papers to generate original reporting.

I don't think there's much journalism going on, the DMN seems to have a PR hotline. You guys do seem to generate many stories, conduct in depth investigations and have more entertaining classifieds.

Arguably, the death of papers might reduce voting outcomes, which would put a premium on informed voters votes. Does the DMN serve anyone with their voting guides? Isn't that of marginal ethical standards, for a paper to endorse candidates?

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 8:51AM

John says:

Scott, you seem to be having a lot of trouble with an obvious distinction. The DO is a newspaper. The DMN is a whorehouse.

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 9:11AM

DL says:

"The DMN is a whorehouse"

So the DMN be advertising in the back of the DO?

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 9:44AM

Kenneth Almquist says:

One number given at the hearing (probably by Moroney) was that 80% of a newspaper's revenues come from advertising. So the fact that people don't pay to read news on the internet is only a small part of the problem. The main issue, it seems to me, is that the advertising rates on the internet are not high enough to support the newspapers. I assume that if the Dallas Morning News charged the same rates for print and web advertisements, they wouldn't sell any web advertisements at all. Advertisers would instead advertise on blogs, other newspapers, or non-news websites. I think that the nature of the internet may mean that advertising rates on the internet will always be too low to support a major news organization.

Posted On: Thursday, May. 7 2009 @ 3:33PM

Anonymous says:

Moroney's last suggestion, that newspapers should be given special priviledges to sue Internet content aggregators, is scary. And Pelosi and The Messiah may be cunning enough to do it.

Imagine a world on the Internet where you are unable to link to a news story for fear of getting sued under federal copyright protection laws. Or, better yet, unable to comment on a source because, well, you'd get sued by the army of BELO lawyers in the death star!

Pelosi and The Messiah will do it because they'll be afforded "special protection" in the nation's dailies. Then who'd want to read newspapers anymore?

Posted On: Friday, May. 8 2009 @ 9:48AM