naked capitalism

vlade says:

I killed my paid on-line subscription years ago, when they were suffering from technical troubles every other day (saying i was logged in and then denying access to an article becasue I wasn’t etc..). I read them now and then – mostly Wolf and Munchau, but I’d never pay for the content again. I buy the paper now and then when I forget to take a book on train and there’s nothing in Guardian, but again, generaly read lex, and maybe an interesting editorial. Rest of the news I can find on internet.
Bring back papers that do a real journalism and true opinio-formers – anyone can do a simple news reporting these days!

Anonymous says:

I feel the same way about the WSJ after Rupert bought it out and started to compete with the NYT.

It is blogs like this though that have filled in many of the blanks from the major business dailies.

William Mitchell says:

The central problem is that online news generates too little revenue to pay for reporters.

This is a problem for Yves and other high-end bloggers, who are in a sense senior editors not tied to any one source. If basic reporting goes away, they have a problem.

This spiral may end well. When most printed papers fail, the remaining print audience will be driven online, where a few will be willing to pay. The publishers’ costs will fall, revenue will rise, and equilibrium will be restored.

I hope.

Anonymous says:

I have been subscribing to the FT and also to their weekly sister publication The Economist for many years and I let both subscriptions run out earlier this year because I felt the same. They have definitely lost their edge in my view, and not just by a little bit. All the news you need are available today for free on-line and nowadays blog sites like this one and other good quality ones have got definitely an edge when it comes to commentaries and insights. The power of networks of independent thinkers with the best ones emerging by natural selection in the marketplace is very, very disruptive. I would rather spend my money rather on proprietary research and commentaries from Marc Faber, John Williams, James Grant and the likes. This spells big trouble for the established media.

Regards, APM

S says:

right on. There wwas a post on the economist forum last week that was from mars. It was the same day that the loathsome Gordeon Richman posted that the world currency (time for)is nearing. The editorial page is definitly heading downhill and I marked it when they ran a celebratory editorial on keynes.

Charles Frith says:

Good quality RSS coming out of the FT though. In my opinion.

Anonymous says:

The FT’s problem is that they don’t like money and have even less understanding of how it is made.

They have been a major supporter of the EU, no matter how awful it’s consequences are, they love the UN and have never met a Tranzi they didn’t like.

Free enterprise is anethma to them, they love big soft left government, which short of communism is the worst seed ground you could imagine, to make money in.

It’s pink for a good reason, that is their world out look.

curious-er says:

The minute the US became their biggest market, they started dumbing it down….

If this connection is true, what a sad commentary on the US!

apachecadillac says:

No, it has not lost its edge.

It has reached its apogee and with its success its tone has become more magisterial and a bit less tart. Which is probably why this group still likes Alphaville.

Of course, it’s easy to slide from magisterial to pompous, what with the gravitas and all that. Lord knows there are many examples in journalism of that trajectory.

John says:

Yup, I agree. Something about when it bacame “more American” it started to “get dumb”. I guess that’s a pattern. All Americans can comprehend is dumbass optimism.

Anonymous says:

This definitely qualifies as “olds.” All major papers are becoming more dependent on advertisers as subscriptions and classifieds revenues slide. (For ex., today, one of Canada’s big print media guys, Quebecor, announced a new, large round of layoffs)

This is not without implications. AS mentioned above, the sometimes excellent writers in the blogworld rely on news collection organizations such as Bloomberg/ThomsonR/FT… and it is unclear how these organizations will sustain what little “objectivity” or “balance” in the face of advertisers relatively rising influence.

For instance, Canada’s GlobeandMail has been notably circumspect with its reporting on their corporate parent, BCE. The paper has also shaded coverage of Canada’s frozen ABCP market, and kept Madoff of the front page section, likely because of the influence of Canada’s banking system on ad revenues. Autos, which continue to have a disproportionate effect on ad revenue, have been covered with a union-busting mentality, while legitimate and even overriding concerns, such as the global prisoners dillemma of auto (over-)production, are ignored.

Beyond the quasi-Chomskian stuff, there is the worry that the diffracted blogoshpere that purports to be the heir to the modern news model will usher in a era of renewed partisanship…

here’s Mr. Gardner, a Canadian blogger who’s been wringing his hands quite a bit on the subject:

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/katzenjammer/archive/2008/12/15/journalists-have-mortgages-too.aspx

Anonymous says:

I was very troubled with the coverage of Turkey and Russia in FT and the Economist. All the reporting is extremely onesided bordering on Stalin style propaganda.

Paul W says:

Not as insightful and brave as it used to be, perhaps because there is less analysis or more sensationalism/opinion – a lower level of sophistication is being targeted it seems. On the other hand, FT Alphaville has improved the overall experience. (I had technical problems too, but switching to a browser that did not have my log-in information saved solved the problem.)

It’s still the best MSM publication out there by far. I’ll keep my subscription while they work out the kinks of the reinvention.

Also perhaps a tad too much overlap between the FT and the Economist. I know the same group owns them, but if they are going to cadge each others’ reporting, a discounted combined subscription would be welcome.

Jojo says:

And one problem I have with FT is that in order to pass on any links to to others, the other person is first required to register before they can read the article.

This is poor policy that dissuades people from trying to read their articles online.

Abbott_Of_Iona says:

No offence.

But has Naked Capitalism lost its edge?

The USA has offically gone to ZIRP.

Who cares if the FT has lost its edge? Is there nothing more important to highlight?

raylopez99 says:

plenty of puns (the last being a British journalistic weakness)

I think this is characteristic of the English language and not limited to the FT. Read Herman Melville but pace George Orwell. Thar she blows, down the memory hole! Punny stuff, eh?

dd says:

First I stopped reading NYT
Then WSJ/Barrons
Now I’m down to weekend FT
And now doing research and analysis
Prospectuses have more info
But could be as untrustworthy
as a Madoff ADV
Sigh

john bougearel says:

Yves,

You know, if I didn’t know any better, I’d say either Matt D wrote this post, or Matt D put you up to it!