Smart writers and columnists should therefore set up their own sites and blogs, and arrange for MSM companies or other sources to link to them or duplicate them. At least that way, if the MSM company folds or the contract is over, the material won’t be lost to the world. As David mentioned, the cost of storage is low enough these days… so is the cost of a website or blog.

Sure, it likely means more work for the writer/columnist… but it would be a small price to pay for making sure your work stays up.

As I say on my site promoting my newspaper novel:

Money. That’s the real issue here. I’m not sure what the solution is. Just how much downsizing can newspapers do? And you can’t instantly say good-bye to paper editions in most cases—not when Net-related parts of newspaper contribute so little revenue…

Do you really think bloggers and the rest will have the same resources as the old media? Yes, small guys broke stories like My Lai. But I’m talking about sustained efforts. I don’t think that foundations like the Sandlers’ can bear the entire burden, and just as with regular newspapers, funders will have to isolate their private interests from the activities of the editors and reporters they’re financing…

Thanks,
David

How many times have webloggers chortled at the closure of another newspaper? How many times have webloggers gloated about how we will win over Big Media?

The thing is, when Big Media is gone, who will we quote? Who will we link? Where will the underlying credibility for our stories be found?

Isn’t this exactly what webloggers have wanted all along?

http://www.thomascrampton.com/media/why-do-publishers-nuke-themselves-online-an-opportunity/

Interestingly, after PW zapped tens of thousands of my words, no one in big media gave a squat. I wondered why the NYT didn’t show an interest in my plight. Because somehow it didn’t know? Or because the NYT was just looking ahead?

Given the low price of storage—not to mention the ad revenue potential—it is just plain stupidity to zap old links.

David