Information vs. Wisdom & A Fundamental Paradox

Wisdom continues to be in short supply these days, even as we are overwhelmed with information. The task of sorting through the information at our fingertips, in order to find meaning, serves a useful purpose. For many years this was the job of journalists. As we've seen, lately, with the demise of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Denver's Rocky Mountain News, we'll have fewer traditional journalists helping us find meaning out of all the information available. TV news rooms have also shrunk. In several markets stations are pooling resources to save money, which means that fewer folks are out there gathering the news. As newspapers fail and TV stations--at least some in several markets--get out of the news business, social media in the form of websites like Facebook and Twitter offer more streams of information, but little more in the way of wisdom or meaning. The formula for a future with more wisdom and meaning in our lives has to include the best of journalism using the tools of the 21st Century, including social media and the evolving technologies of tomorrow. Where corporate newspapers and television stations have failed, entrepreneurs must emerge to fill the gap.

Understanding a fundamental paradox may help to navigate the economic obstacles blocking the best in journalism from finding its way with new technologies. Simply stated, contract and simplify to grow and thrive. To understand complexity we need simplicity. The hierarchies of traditional newspaper journalism were created to service large organizations requiring printing presses and distribution networks. Likewise, TV newsrooms needed big cameras, transmitters, and teams of people with different skills to produce all the material that fills a newscast.

For the individual journalists with entrepreneurial know how, the future is filled with opportunities. But the scale of organizations must be manageable and focused. Being the biggest can get in the way of being the best. Clearly, there will be large media organizations that continue to thrive and offer timely and meaningful content. The networks, a few national papers and magazines serve the public in important ways. But the days of five or more stations doing TV news in every market of reasonable size will certainly change. And as we're seeing with large daily newspapers starting to crumble, that era is over, too.

So back to the fundamental paradox and who will pay for the nimble entrepreneurs creating all this meaningful content? A few models of success come to mind. The West Seattle Blog was started by TV journalist Tracy Record and her husband Patrick Sand. Frustrated by the lack of good hyper local coverage of their neighborhood, the blog evolved into a business that makes money from advertising. Another local success story is The Voice of San Diego. It follows a non-advertising model, relying on donations from members, similar to how PBS and NPR stations raise revenue. And right now there are a number of new entries getting ready to launch including the San Diego News Network, and a web only version of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

To remain vital, these new media enterprises will have to continue evolving. As we've observed over the course of many years, technological innovation precedes the way content providers adapt. Sometimes it happens very fast. In the case of TV and newspapers it has been a slow, and now painful, evolution over the course of more than a decade. The advantage newer media entries share is their smaller scale allows them to change quickly. After all, it's much easier to steer a sports car than an 18 wheeler; of course, both require skill.