Straits Times and the Blogs
As only to be expected, Straits Times' announcement about paid access to ST Interactive sparked a reaction from Singapore's Blogosphere (or that corner of the Blogosphere in Singapore, depending on how you see it). I've already cited the responses from Singapore Ink and IZ Reloaded in the previous post. In fact, a technorati search for "Straits Times subscription" turned up some 116 posts as of 4 pm Feb 25 EST).
Mr Brown, apart from being the first to put the news out online (by posting ST's email to the registered users) also has a column in TODAY (Feb 25) in which he details the many things that can be read online for free. He also left an interesting comment on Singapore Ink's second post the long and short of which is nicely summed up in his parting rhetorical question:
But let's be realistic here. ST obviously has no monopoly over what counts as a newsworthy item of Singapore life, and there is a lot of space that can be fruitfully covered by blogs. But I wouldn’t for a moment imagine that there aren’t large and significant areas of life in Singapore and the region that blogs will be able to do much (at this stage) without something like a ST--with all its reporters, financial resources, etc.
I mentioned earlier the example of SAF's relief effort in Meulaboh--but even that is only the tip of the iceberg as far as Singapore’s relief efforts are concerned. I don’t think the picture in Meulaboh, Banda Aceh, Medan, Phuket–not to mention the Maldives, etc., would be as clear if we only had MINDEF/MFA press releases and the blogs. In fact, not even CNA and TODAY, which run similar stories, provided as much details-–details that are not all that easy to come by if you are not there yourself as a SAF, SCDF or NGO personnel. And the international news agencies and wire services are not really helpful here--we are too small for them to care. And all the above stands even though we now have excellent blogs such as Terse and at Large giving us such exquisite and up close reportage of the situation in Meulaboh. But we did not have a blogger on the RSS Endurance, or with the Guardsmen manning the logistics HQ in Medan, or the field hospitals, or with the Chinook crew plying the route to and from Banda Aceh, or what about the folks with the SCDF in Thailand, or the various medical teams in Sri Lanka. (If you are involved in these or other related operations, here's a challenge: start your own blog; or if you know of people blogging first hand about these items, please, please drop me a line.)
As I see it, the blogs can do a good job--potentially a much much better job than ST--in three regards. (1) Very specialized and up close reportage (e.g., Terse and at Large). But at the end of the day, the blogs are not quite at the level of ST’s overall news collecting ability for certain kinds of events, and I doubt that we ever will completely replace something like a ST in this regard. More importantly, (2) punditry, commentary, pointing out the biases, etc. (e.g., funding for Biomed startups, anyone? Or how about this?) In this regard, I think the blogs collectively bury the ST editorials and reviews (or relegate it to be at best one voice among many). A crowd is never wise, but there are inevitably many individuals who knows some few things very well in a crowd--and who knows those few things to a much higher degree than a ST editor can ever hope to be. That's why I say that collectively, the blogs will bury ST. And related but distinct from the previous, (3) functioning as a channel for lively critical discussions on the issues of the day (think "Jamie Han", and multiply that by many times). In this regard, the blogs will potentially render ST Forum Page redundant. My own prediction is that, barring any drastic curb of internet freedom, (2) and (3) will form important aspects of a wider civic discourse in Singapore for years to come, if such is not already happening.
The relationship between ST (and the other press houses) and the blogs is thus, at it's very best, complementary. They are not exactly substitutes for each other. It is in light of these considerations that ST's decision to go for paid subscription is, in a sense, bad (but not fatal) news for bloggers.
UPDATE: AcidFlask of Caustic Soda agrees and has this to add:
UPDATE 2: I think I'm being browned...(where are my manners) Welcome, dear reader, if you've just wandered here from Mr Brown's post about Blogs vs. Journalism (and if you did not, he has a link to a very funny segment of the Daily Show about the role of blogs). But if you are looking for a more analytical discussion on the potential power of blogs, one that makes use of such imposing ("cheem") technical terms as "the long tail" and "high trust environment", you'd have to see this instead.
UPDATE 3: A reader reminded me in the comments about The Singapore Commentator's take on the issue--he links to an interesting write-up on the Wall Street Journal, which has been charging its online subscribers for some time now. While the readership continues to be high (2.1 million for the dead tree version, 684,000 for the online version), the WSJ is risking a slide into irrelevance:
UPDATE 4: This is not going to die fast--more comments from Singapore Ink. I'm beginning to wonder if there are readers of ST who will (like myself) eventually switch to a online-only subscription, especially if ST is willing to put everything (or just about) on the print edition online as well?
UPDATE 5: Next post on this matter is here.
Mr Brown, apart from being the first to put the news out online (by posting ST's email to the registered users) also has a column in TODAY (Feb 25) in which he details the many things that can be read online for free. He also left an interesting comment on Singapore Ink's second post the long and short of which is nicely summed up in his parting rhetorical question:
...who says blogs cannot potentially cover Singapore news as well as the Straits Times?There's a lot to be said for this sentiment. The fact is, there is a lot of stuff out there in the public domain that is not often reported in ST. Secondly, individual blogs are doing a great job covering various aspects of life in Singapore, stuff that hardly ever makes the press. Thirdly, let's not "forget alternative sources of Singapore news" (mainstream), such as "Channelnewsasia, Yahoo, and TODAY". So all in all, there's something very right about the claim that ST is not completely indispensable.
But let's be realistic here. ST obviously has no monopoly over what counts as a newsworthy item of Singapore life, and there is a lot of space that can be fruitfully covered by blogs. But I wouldn’t for a moment imagine that there aren’t large and significant areas of life in Singapore and the region that blogs will be able to do much (at this stage) without something like a ST--with all its reporters, financial resources, etc.
I mentioned earlier the example of SAF's relief effort in Meulaboh--but even that is only the tip of the iceberg as far as Singapore’s relief efforts are concerned. I don’t think the picture in Meulaboh, Banda Aceh, Medan, Phuket–not to mention the Maldives, etc., would be as clear if we only had MINDEF/MFA press releases and the blogs. In fact, not even CNA and TODAY, which run similar stories, provided as much details-–details that are not all that easy to come by if you are not there yourself as a SAF, SCDF or NGO personnel. And the international news agencies and wire services are not really helpful here--we are too small for them to care. And all the above stands even though we now have excellent blogs such as Terse and at Large giving us such exquisite and up close reportage of the situation in Meulaboh. But we did not have a blogger on the RSS Endurance, or with the Guardsmen manning the logistics HQ in Medan, or the field hospitals, or with the Chinook crew plying the route to and from Banda Aceh, or what about the folks with the SCDF in Thailand, or the various medical teams in Sri Lanka. (If you are involved in these or other related operations, here's a challenge: start your own blog; or if you know of people blogging first hand about these items, please, please drop me a line.)
As I see it, the blogs can do a good job--potentially a much much better job than ST--in three regards. (1) Very specialized and up close reportage (e.g., Terse and at Large). But at the end of the day, the blogs are not quite at the level of ST’s overall news collecting ability for certain kinds of events, and I doubt that we ever will completely replace something like a ST in this regard. More importantly, (2) punditry, commentary, pointing out the biases, etc. (e.g., funding for Biomed startups, anyone? Or how about this?) In this regard, I think the blogs collectively bury the ST editorials and reviews (or relegate it to be at best one voice among many). A crowd is never wise, but there are inevitably many individuals who knows some few things very well in a crowd--and who knows those few things to a much higher degree than a ST editor can ever hope to be. That's why I say that collectively, the blogs will bury ST. And related but distinct from the previous, (3) functioning as a channel for lively critical discussions on the issues of the day (think "Jamie Han", and multiply that by many times). In this regard, the blogs will potentially render ST Forum Page redundant. My own prediction is that, barring any drastic curb of internet freedom, (2) and (3) will form important aspects of a wider civic discourse in Singapore for years to come, if such is not already happening.
The relationship between ST (and the other press houses) and the blogs is thus, at it's very best, complementary. They are not exactly substitutes for each other. It is in light of these considerations that ST's decision to go for paid subscription is, in a sense, bad (but not fatal) news for bloggers.
UPDATE: AcidFlask of Caustic Soda agrees and has this to add:
...the loosely-connected diversity of opinion available on blogs are the biggest advantage of blog media, and also its biggest disadvantage. the paradox of quality analysis and opinions without publicity. blogrolls help to some extent, but really aid those who are in the loop already, with the possible exceptions of blogrolls by celebrated bloggers.The one thing, I gather, that really gets him (understatement), would be the ST editors:
one thing in particular that i now feel strongly about are the morons who work the op/eds desk in the straits times. many of the columnists are tepid at best, if not downright wrong. (take shianux's case study of one of andy ho's pieces, for example.) and the high noise-to-signal ratio of so many of the published submissions to the forum is just ridiculous. one may bitch about how the standard is already way higher than the fora in most other newspapers (which are mostly inane responses to provocative articles), but given the st forum's unique role as a formal hitching post for singaporean society, such aggressive editorial policy in trimming most of the signal is really reprehensible. what, do we need to bitch to lky about not being able to publish in the forum in order for our submissions to show up?Well, as Wannabe Lawyer puts it, sometimes complaining actually works.
UPDATE 2: I think I'm being browned...(where are my manners) Welcome, dear reader, if you've just wandered here from Mr Brown's post about Blogs vs. Journalism (and if you did not, he has a link to a very funny segment of the Daily Show about the role of blogs). But if you are looking for a more analytical discussion on the potential power of blogs, one that makes use of such imposing ("cheem") technical terms as "the long tail" and "high trust environment", you'd have to see this instead.
UPDATE 3: A reader reminded me in the comments about The Singapore Commentator's take on the issue--he links to an interesting write-up on the Wall Street Journal, which has been charging its online subscribers for some time now. While the readership continues to be high (2.1 million for the dead tree version, 684,000 for the online version), the WSJ is risking a slide into irrelevance:
Since most people refuse to pay for WSJ stories, most bloggers are reluctant to link to them. It also has an impact on anyone who uses the web for research -- and there are a lot of us. As importantly, the next generation of readers is growing up by accessing news over the internet, and one place they are not surfing to is WSJ.com. With their habits being formed now, there is little chance the Journal will become part of their lives, either now or in the future.The question is whether ST will end up this way (i.e., irrelevant). Here, I'm not so sure, at least for the short to medium run. For good or for evil, ST is the premier English paper in Singapore. If you are American and can't/don't get WSJ.com, there's still a host of other decent presses available online. But until TODAY becomes as extensive in its coverage (and I am talking about local and regional stuff here), ST will continue to exert influence in Singapore by its near monopolistic status.
UPDATE 4: This is not going to die fast--more comments from Singapore Ink. I'm beginning to wonder if there are readers of ST who will (like myself) eventually switch to a online-only subscription, especially if ST is willing to put everything (or just about) on the print edition online as well?
UPDATE 5: Next post on this matter is here.
Permalink |
|
| 
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home