Slugger O'Toole

Conversation, politics and stray insights

“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”

Fri 24 February 2012, 7:44am

So reports TechCrunch. I’m all for easing access to information – but this feels somewhat worrying. Yes, it’s great to be able to ‘deep-dive’ on topics of choice but if this leads people to simply reading less, it’s not all for the good.

And what’s the impact on various ‘unsexy’ news departments within the paper once advertizers  zoom in on investing advertizing revenue not in the Post but specifically and exclusively, instead, on the sections people are reading?

Will the gossip/celebrity/”Lifestyle” stuff swallow up the paper’s depleting resources, pitting  science and research reporters up against the Sportsdesk, no longer colleagues so much as flat-out competitors?

Or…maybe it will help the less read sections attract better aligned advertizers at lower more affordable rates. Even if, no longer will feel like a holistic Newspaper to advertizers, staff or readers. Which is kinda sad.

Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Delicious Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Digg Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Facebook Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Google+ Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on LinkedIn Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Pinterest Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on reddit Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on StumbleUpon Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Twitter Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Add to Bookmarks Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Email Share '“Washington Post Tests Personalized News Program”' on Print Friendly

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2003 - 2012 Slugger O'Toole Ltd. All rights reserved.
Powered by WordPress; produced by Puffbox.
9 queries. 0.837 seconds.