tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1538462459035039807.post8435029132064473484..comments2009-11-25T00:06:28.510-05:00Richard Whittallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18267088105544695799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1538462459035039807.post-37872668856053357292009-11-25T00:06:28.510-05:002009-11-25T00:06:28.510-05:00Richard you seem pretty set in stone that the &quot;current print business model&quot; must continue or paywalls will be raised. I think the online model is profitable, just not with the old infrastructure. The printing press put a ton of handwriting monks out of work for a time, but eventually the ease of consumption led to an increase in readership overall etc etc<br /><br />I believe we are in a &quot;hiccup zone&quot;. <br /><br />Everyone loves the NYTimes baghdad office example, but in terms of my media consumption that is a fraction of a fraction. And as per soccer stories, the media has no monopoly on breaking stories or gathering facts. Any blog can get good tips and sources so, ahem, why pay for Murdoch?elliotthttp://futfanatico.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1538462459035039807.post-89996054681320990072009-11-24T12:19:46.539-05:002009-11-24T12:19:46.539-05:00Ok, if you say so.Fake Sigihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16703163654780783668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1538462459035039807.post-69657302076374144382009-11-24T12:18:27.233-05:002009-11-24T12:18:27.233-05:00Let&#39;s just say I have a good source on this one...Richard Whittallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18267088105544695799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1538462459035039807.post-13318296026326925842009-11-24T11:35:47.887-05:002009-11-24T11:35:47.887-05:00Feel like posting a source about the Guardian&#39;s soccer coverage losing mone? At least according to Wikipedia the Guardian&#39;s online arm was profitable three years ago.Fake Sigihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16703163654780783668noreply@blogger.com