Hypothetical Question: Which Would You Give Up?

[Brad King]

Here is a hypothetical. Which of these would you give up for one week on the Web?

Google or your local newspaper?
MovieFone or your local newspaper’s reviews?
Travelocity or your local newspaper’s travel section?

And, if you'd be so kind...Why?

[Brad King]

What if there was no local news at all? What if it was EITHER/OR: Google or your hometown newspaper?

Which then?

[Chris Graves]

See my post above, but http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/interviews/schmidt....">posting Schmidt quote here too ...

“We're in fact critically dependent upon the success of these newspapers. We don't write the content. We're not in the content business. ... There's no question that we depend critically upon reporters reporting new facts, new stories, new ideas. Almost all interesting news seems to start from a reporter on a beat in a country uncovering something or reporting their observations about what they're seeing.”

[Brad King]

Ah, but I would argue that is changing. When I do a search for most information - movies, travel, politics, arts, music - the sites that both come up and that are most trafficked are not newspapers.

I would argue that Google and its kind are simply playing nice -- since, as you know -- newspapers have variously sued Google for its search content.

Having covered copyright trials, the tact from tech companies is to mollify as much as possible (to see how that doesn't work, search "Sean Parker, Napster, fired" and read a fun story about what happens when you get uppity with media companies).

That quote -- to me -- doesn't answer the question in a substantial way because if newspapers were important to Google: Google News would get much more attention and its search results would be set up to deliver big bang.

I would argue neither truly happens.

[Chris Graves]

It seems to me as if you are arguing against professional newsgathering organizations. And I've heard you argue just the opposite in conversations: Let technologist in to do technology to free up journalists to do journalism.

Perhaps I am missing the point (as you have often been known to say).

Are you really arguing platform of delivery or source of delivery?

Or neither.

Enlighten me, dear professor

[Brad King]

What I'm arguing is that if you erased newspapers today or erased Google/search today...which would be missed more?

I think it's much more likely that a new, modern brand of so-called professional journalism would spring up that did a much better job of informing the public.

If you erased Google/search today, you would have a world that was far less informed but ruled by corporate media.

You have never heard me argue that newspapers inherently need to be the news gathering organizations. I would venture to guess that many "professional" reporters could be replaced with so-called "amateur" bloggers and do a job that would be indistinguishable.

I believe that those who are great at gathering and writing news should be freed to do that.

I am not convinced that happens best at newspapers.