Some people in the Pacific Northwest sound very confused to me.
A movement is stirring to keep the Seattle Post Intelligencer going.
According to a P-I employee website, journalists plan to keep an online version of their paper going for at least a couple of months if the papert stops publishing, which could happen mid-March.
Someone tell me if I’m wrong, but if the Seattle PI’s owners close the newspaper down, employees can’t keep doing an online version claiming to still be the Seattle PI. Wouldn’t that be trademark infringement?
The goal is to get subscribers and philanthropists to fund the online version.
Subscription money can’t keep a printed newspaper afloat. Why would it be any different for a online one?
“In the short run, the hope really lies with grant makers, foundations, and individuals who have a large sum of money at their disposal and want to invest it in their community to support journalism that goes two, three, or four layers deep,” said Reporter Daniel Lathrop.
P-I staffers point to successful online papers in Minnesota and San Diego. They think the same type of models could work in Seattle and believe people appreciate the kind of watch-dog and community reporting the P-I offers.
The Hearst Corporation, the P-I’s owner, plans to sell the newspaper if no buyer steps forward.
That last sentence makes me laugh. Hearst plans to sell the paper even after no buyer steps forward. I think the author means, plans to close.
The above article looks like it wasn’t proofread. Is this the kind of product the online Seattle PI would produce?
If a philantropist won’t step forward to take the newspaper off Hearst’s hand, why is it plausible one would want to finance a online version? I guess they wouldn’t be saddled with the debts the Seattle PI has at present. Still this is all pretty wishful thinking. I understand people fear losing their jobs, but daydreaming that your soon to be extinct newspaper can be kept miraculously alive in the way you describe is not in sync with reality.