A proposal that might save newspapers Peninsula Press Club: Peter Scheer . . . has come up with an idea that might save the newspaper business. In a commentary posted on the CFAC Web site, he suggests that newspapers keep news stories off of their free Web sites for 24 hours in order to make their print (and paid Web) editions more valuable. A few years ago, newspaper executives who were trying to develop their
Flabbergasted Steve Fox: Every now and then, you read a piece where you have to stop, take a breath and then go back and make sure you actually just read that. Peter Scheer, billed as a lawyer, journalist and executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, columnizes in the San Francisco ?Chronicle that newspapers and wire services, to help protect their collective bottom lines, should embargo their news content from the “free Internet” for
A bad approach to the problem Bert Carelli: Peter Scheer, Executive Director of the California First Amendment Coalition, authored a provocative opinion piece in yesterday’s San Francisco Chronicle, suggesting that newspapers should raise the value of subscription services by enforcing an industry-wide 24-hour embargo on news content before it is made accessible through the free portals and search engines. Scheer says that even the most successful newspapers have trouble selling online advertising that covers even
Newspapers are not dead yet. But their hoped-for rebirth as Internet ventures requires a new strategy to create value in their journalism. Proposal: Papers should agree to 24-hour delay in release of their content, free, on web. By Peter Scheer Reports of the imminent death of newspapers–which lately have become a staple in the very newspapers that are said to be flat-lining–are, as a good print journalist once said, greatly exaggerated. Newspapers, especially big metropolitan
Your Turn A Commentary on the Hewlett-Packard leak-plugging scandal, appearing in the last Flash, generated a number of letters and emails. The Commentary, “FREE THE HEWLETT-PACKARD 5!” argued that corporations must be allowed to investigate suspected leakers in their own ranks so that the press can remain free to publish leaks, and also urged caution in criminalizing “pretexting” because of its similarity to some types of investigative reporting. A selection of responses begins with the