So does this suggest that news organizations are not self supporting, that is, Bloomberg's fees from the financial data seem to support the news organization.
I think that as it stands, this is the reality. The Washington Post is similar in that their Kaplan business supports the newsroom.
What I think may happen though, is that players like WaPo and Bloomberg will ultimately emerge with profitable news businesses because competitors will go out of businesses and their assets will be able to be picked up at fire sale prices and benefit from a lack of competition.
Yes this is true of Reuters as well. Which is fine; the point of the news from the POV of the people paying for the service is to inform their trading decisions.
"It’s also trying to revamp its Web site and television programming — long neglected inside the company — into services that appeal to people who don’t trade securities for a living."
Or decent keyboards for their terminals. The new ones are glorified laptop keyboards, complete with non-standard key layout and a really shallow keystroke. And the fingerprint readers still break all the time. If you're selling software that costs $25k/yr, the least you can do is provide a decent keyboard.
Bloomberg's offices are, depending on who you ask, either fantastic or terrible.
Yes, they've got a bunch of art and screens everywhere (including a curved escalator, which I had never seen before I went there). Yes, there are some great free snacks. Yes, there is some nice public art, and a decent corporate dining room.
On the other hand, it's still somewhat of a sweatshop. The whole office is open plan - the highest dividers between workstations rise about seven inches above desk-level and louder than they describe it. The whole building is covered in monitors that display, in real-time, information about how terminal sales are going. When you pull up an employee's internal profile page (which is accessible to anyone within the company), it lists what time you badged in and out for the past week.
The layout of the office isn't significantly different to what you'll find at any modern investment bank, open plan offices are the norm in the industry. So much so that when they filmed the movie "A Good Year" the scenes of a trading floor were actually filmed in a Bloomberg office rather than at a bank.
I remember stepping into part of a fountain that looked like an ultra-glossy floor next to some green plastic stairs the first time I was in a Bloomberg office. The visual and aural clutter there was remarkable.
Yeah, but in order to get that quality information typically you need to be one of the higher regarded 'brand' news organizations. The journalists at the WSJ and the NYTimes are probably going to have better sources than those at Bloomberg and in turn break better stories... making them more "informational".
I understand your logic, but starting with the Drudge report in 1998 -- when they were the first to break the Monica and Clinton scandal -- it looks like the flowered garden is no longer and anyone can break a story.
I don't believe it is "getting quality information".
13 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 34.4 ms ] threadWhat I think may happen though, is that players like WaPo and Bloomberg will ultimately emerge with profitable news businesses because competitors will go out of businesses and their assets will be able to be picked up at fire sale prices and benefit from a lack of competition.
"It’s also trying to revamp its Web site and television programming — long neglected inside the company — into services that appeal to people who don’t trade securities for a living."
Yes, they've got a bunch of art and screens everywhere (including a curved escalator, which I had never seen before I went there). Yes, there are some great free snacks. Yes, there is some nice public art, and a decent corporate dining room.
On the other hand, it's still somewhat of a sweatshop. The whole office is open plan - the highest dividers between workstations rise about seven inches above desk-level and louder than they describe it. The whole building is covered in monitors that display, in real-time, information about how terminal sales are going. When you pull up an employee's internal profile page (which is accessible to anyone within the company), it lists what time you badged in and out for the past week.
“We want to be the world’s most influential news organization,” says Mr. Lack, who oversees Bloomberg’s television, radio and dot-com endeavors.
The most influential? If there was ever a more honest statement. Why should news be influential and not informational?
You aim for influence in the news because politics and business are at your mercy? I'm ok with that, but don't call yourself a "news" organization.
News is as cheap as love.
I don't believe it is "getting quality information".
No, it is "controlling information."