This post is inspired by a column in SFBG by Tim Redmont, where Tim gets kinda sick of 'Craig Newmark's Community BS'. Tim argues. He says he find it nearly impossible to believe community advice from Craig Newmark.
Tim goes on ranting,
How, exactly, does a San Francisco outfit moving into, say, Burlington, Vt. and threatening to eviscerate the local alternative newspaper, help build community? If he's such an altruist, why does he have to keep expanding like a typical predatory chain? We all get the need for online ads and community sites now; why not let the folks in Burlington (or wherever) build their own? Why not (gasp) help them, instead of using his clout to hurt them?It was quiet interesting to see Newspaper Editors getting so afraid of online communities that their arguments become garbled.This isn't such a radical idea. Check out the blog world, where the best political bloggers don't try to corner the market - they encourage others to start their own blogs.
Here are my answers to these questions (although they were asked to Craig):
Community means participation. The old top-down approach of newspapers won't do. Think about this. Have you heard about any communities of readers of Wall Street Journal Readers or New York Times? The participatory nature of all Craig list sites makes them stand apart. Just check out the Discussion Forums, personals and so on. If this is not a community, then what is? And remember most of these services are free except a few. They are also very cost effective compare to other media. The Spartan look of the site doesn't scare the normal user.
Newspapers owners and editors are so dependent on their old models, that it takes real guts to think of new model. Where do you start from?
I have some suggestions
1. You have to do something about those fancy offices, and expensive pay packets. Forget all about that celebrity status.
2. Get serious about your online plans, instead of cursing Craig Newmark.
Do it fast, citizen journalism is not going to knock but break your fat doors.